US Oil Production/Consumption

A forum not related to waterfowl for discussing the more controversial and hot topic issues in our world from immigration, politics, the war, etc..

Moderators: Smackaduck, MM

US Oil Production/Consumption

Postby WoodyWhiffingMG » Mon Sep 23, 2013 7:35 am

2,555,000,000 barrels domestically recovered in 2012
2,920,000,000 barrels projected domestic recovery for 2013
6,720,000,000 barrels estimated feasible long-term yearly domestic recovery rate

6,514,285,714 barrels Average yearly domestic consumption


So, if we currently have the technology and infrastructure to be a net exporter of crude oil, why are we importing about 4,000,000,000 barrels yearly?

Average cost per gal. US gasoline: $3.49
Average cost per gal. Saudi Arabia gasoline: $0.61

Saudi Arabia crude oil exports (net) 2012: 3,098,850,000 barrels
Saudi Arabia crude oil domestic consumption: 661,200,000 barrels
Current US feasible long-term yearly export (net): 200,000,000 barrels

Cost of oil per barrel (9/23/2013): (~) $107.00

$21,400,000,000.00 more in exports out of the US
$428,000,000,000.00 less in foreign imports into US

$449,400,000,000.00 in total economic gain for the US


Also, the majority of the nearly half a trillion dollars is going to the Middle East to countries that are known to harbor terrorists.
Where we are now at war or are occupying/keep a military presence to protect "our" interests...

Why is the US importing about 4,000,000,000 barrels yearly?

Current US unemployment rate: “7.6”% (more like 12%)
Current average US income: $27,000 ($52,000 per household)
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html
Average oil rig income (US): $99,175
http://money.cnn.com/2012/05/10/news/economy/oil_workers/index.htm
Workers currently employed in the US oil industry (directly/indirectly): 9.8 million
http://energytomorrow.org/economy

Doubling the production oil could possibly double the required work force: 19.6 million
(Just to be safe we will say only 9.8+4.9=14.7 million)
Current US Population: 313 million
Currently unemployed and looking: 23 million
Possible: 13.988 to 18.88 million (4.4 - 6.03%)
5% just by taking advantage of our oil industry, of course increasing domestic oil production would also increase all of our service industries and many of our consumer goods manufacturing industries... and the savings from reduced gas costs would circulate to other markets, etc...

Why is the US importing about 4,000,000,000 barrels yearly?
User avatar
WoodyWhiffingMG
hunter
 
Posts: 7467
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 9:30 pm
Location: Back in SW MICHIGAN


Re: US Oil Production/Consumption

Postby SpinnerMan » Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:36 am

The one good argument is the answer to this question.

Do you want to burn their oil first or our oil first?

Since the '70's the importance to the economy has dropped dramatically and the diversity of supply has grown dramatically.

We did not have low unemployment before because we were producing a lot more oil.

Oil is far from the only area that better, smarter, and a hell of a lot less regulations would lead to a lot more jobs, a higher income, and a higher quality of life.

The government should not single out oil. It should treat all businesses the same. We should make the U.S. the best place in the world to make capital investments in every industry. Zero tax on capital, instant depreciation, fair common sense regulation, fair common sense litigation, etc.

WoodyWhiffingMG wrote:Average oil rig income (US): $99,175
The same is true of any skilled worker in a capital intensive industry. It applies across the board. Don't focus too narrowly.

We need workers with valuable skills and capital investments to maximize their productivity.

WoodyWhiffingMG wrote:Workers currently employed in the US oil industry (directly/indirectly): 9.8 million
Workers currently employed in all other industries are over 100 times that. It only takes a small improvement in the rest to eclipse the large benefits in this one industry. Don't focus too narrowly.

And I'm not sure about the answer to my first question. Burn our or burn theirs. I'm comfortable letting the free market decide and that means diversity of supply the world over which things hve improved over the last 40 years.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 15188
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: US Oil Production/Consumption

Postby WoodyWhiffingMG » Mon Sep 23, 2013 9:05 am

SpinnerMan wrote:The one good argument is the answer to this question.

Do you want to burn their oil first or our oil first?


United States (including technically recoverable oil from oil shale) to be 1.442 trillion barrels of oil

That is over 200 years of oil at our current growth rate and with NO advancements in technology.

Plenty of time to responsibly convert infrastructure to a new energy source

SpinnerMan wrote:Since the '70's the importance to the economy has dropped dramatically and the diversity of supply has grown dramatically.

We did not have low unemployment before because we were producing a lot more oil.


Yes, but the cost of gas didn't use to make up as much of the average Americans expendable income.

In 2011, household gasoline expenditures continued its upward trend with an annual average of $2,655. The 26.1% jump in prices that year was more than six-times greater than a 3.4% rise in income.


SpinnerMan wrote:Oil is far from the only area that better, smarter, and a hell of a lot less regulations would lead to a lot more jobs, a higher income, and a higher quality of life.


Completely agree! Oil is just an easy example that directly affects everyone and should be an easy win.

SpinnerMan wrote:The government should not single out oil. It should treat all businesses the same. We should make the U.S. the best place in the world to make capital investments in every industry. Zero tax on capital, instant depreciation, fair common sense regulation, fair common sense litigation, etc.

Completely agree!

SpinnerMan wrote:
WoodyWhiffingMG wrote:Average oil rig income (US): $99,175
The same is true of any skilled worker in a capital intensive industry. It applies across the board. Don't focus too narrowly.

We need workers with valuable skills and capital investments to maximize their productivity.





WoodyWhiffingMG wrote:Workers currently employed in the US oil industry (directly/indirectly): 9.8 million
Workers currently employed in all other industries are over 100 times that. It only takes a small improvement in the rest to eclipse the large benefits in this one industry. Don't focus too narrowly.

Not narrow, just one thread and one topic, brother. :beer:

SpinnerMan wrote:And I'm not sure about the answer to my first question. Burn our or burn theirs. I'm comfortable letting the free market decide


I would argue the free market is not in action in the decision to use more expensive oil from foreign providers, rather government control.


SpinnerMan wrote:and that means diversity of supply the world over which things have improved over the last 40 years.


The free market (within the US) could have diversity of supply from domestic producers. We don't need to keep paying an ass ton more than we should, meanwhile supporting our enemies.
User avatar
WoodyWhiffingMG
hunter
 
Posts: 7467
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 9:30 pm
Location: Back in SW MICHIGAN

Re: US Oil Production/Consumption

Postby SpinnerMan » Mon Sep 23, 2013 9:24 am

WoodyWhiffingMG wrote:United States (including technically recoverable oil from oil shale) to be 1.442 trillion barrels of oil
At what cost? I'm very skeptical of this. Of course, that's why I'm fine with the free market deciding even if the decision is to import a very large fraction.

WoodyWhiffingMG wrote:Yes, but the cost of gas didn't use to make up as much of the average Americans expendable income.

:huh:

Oil and gasoline consume far less of our compensation. Of course, just the income portion is taxed heavily, we get much more of our compensation in other forms. Also, a large fraction of our oil consumption is not the retail gasoline we buy at the local gas station. It's all the oil that goes into the things we buy and that is way down.

But yes, if you take just select pieces of all we earn and all we spend it on, you can find ratios that do not look favorable, but that does not mean it is informative.

WoodyWhiffingMG wrote:Completely agree! Oil is just an easy example that directly affects everyone and should be an easy win.
But you seem to be making the "independence" argument as well. Free trade, true free trade, where everybody decides what is best for them, enriches the most people the most and no ones expense. Trade restriction, and special treatment enrich a subset at the expense of others.

WoodyWhiffingMG wrote:I would argue the free market is not in action in the decision to use more expensive oil from foreign providers, rather government control.
Agreed. It's the control over everything else that they seek and you can't have true free markets and free trade if you want to be in control.

WoodyWhiffingMG wrote:The free market (within the US) could have diversity of supply from domestic producers. We don't need to keep paying an ass ton more than we should, meanwhile supporting our enemies.
Are you sure?

WoodyWhiffingMG wrote:Average cost per gal. Saudi Arabia gasoline: $0.61
If they ever got a free market, they could produce oil so cheap that we couldn't compete. Of course, they would have to give up control and that would enrich their people, which is something they cannot risk. Of course, they would cease to be our enemies if they were free. Something that will probably never happen which is why there will continue to be a demand for higher cost American oil. It just need not be as high as it is.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 15188
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: US Oil Production/Consumption

Postby WoodyWhiffingMG » Mon Sep 23, 2013 9:35 am

SpinnerMan wrote:
WoodyWhiffingMG wrote:United States (including technically recoverable oil from oil shale) to be 1.442 trillion barrels of oil
At what cost? I'm very skeptical of this. Of course, that's why I'm fine with the free market deciding even if the decision is to import a very large fraction.

That's a good point, but I think it is a safe assumption that it would be much cheaper than importing.

SpinnerMan wrote:
WoodyWhiffingMG wrote:Yes, but the cost of gas didn't use to make up as much of the average Americans expendable income.

:huh:

Oil and gasoline consume far less of our compensation. Of course, just the income portion is taxed heavily, we get much more of our compensation in other forms. Also, a large fraction of our oil consumption is not the retail gasoline we buy at the local gas station. It's all the oil that goes into the things we buy and that is way down.

But yes, if you take just select pieces of all we earn and all we spend it on, you can find ratios that do not look favorable, but that does not mean it is informative.

Just an example, Spinner. Yes, the majority of cost is hidden, but I really doubt that the red part is way down... in fact that would be impossible with the cost of gas way up.

SpinnerMan wrote:
WoodyWhiffingMG wrote:Completely agree! Oil is just an easy example that directly affects everyone and should be an easy win.
But you seem to be making the "independence" argument as well. Free trade, true free trade, where everybody decides what is best for them, enriches the most people the most and no ones expense. Trade restriction, and special treatment enrich a subset at the expense of others.

WoodyWhiffingMG wrote:I would argue the free market is not in action in the decision to use more expensive oil from foreign providers, rather government control.
Agreed. It's the control over everything else that they seek and you can't have true free markets and free trade if you want to be in control.

WoodyWhiffingMG wrote:The free market (within the US) could have diversity of supply from domestic producers. We don't need to keep paying an ass ton more than we should, meanwhile supporting our enemies.
Are you sure?

WoodyWhiffingMG wrote:Average cost per gal. Saudi Arabia gasoline: $0.61
If they ever got a free market, they could produce oil so cheap that we couldn't compete. Of course, they would have to give up control and that would enrich their people, which is something they cannot risk. Of course, they would cease to be our enemies if they were free. Something that will probably never happen which is why there will continue to be a demand for higher cost American oil. It just need not be as high as it is.

Exactly, Spinner, if we increase production, that forces them to reduce cost, which ends with us in a better position... we have our cheaper oil and as you said we would lose an enemy.
User avatar
WoodyWhiffingMG
hunter
 
Posts: 7467
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 9:30 pm
Location: Back in SW MICHIGAN

Re: US Oil Production/Consumption

Postby tucker301 » Mon Sep 23, 2013 9:55 am

Saudi oil is cheap and plentiful, and we get to save ours for when theirs runs out.
You're welcome.
tucker301
hunter
 
Posts: 4652
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 1:58 pm

Re: US Oil Production/Consumption

Postby SpinnerMan » Mon Sep 23, 2013 10:27 am

tucker301 wrote:Saudi oil is cheap and plentiful, and we get to save ours for when theirs runs out.
You're welcome.

Unless it becomes obsolete. Then we have simply transferred our wealth unnecessarily to them.

Once those microbiologist figure out how to get bacteria to crap oil, and I think they may, and do it on an industrial scale at low cost, which I'm much more skeptical, we missed our opportunity.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22253746

Researchers genetically modified E. coli bacteria to convert sugar into an oil that is almost identical to conventional diesel.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 15188
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: US Oil Production/Consumption

Postby assateague » Mon Sep 23, 2013 10:42 am

tucker301 wrote:Saudi oil is cheap and plentiful, and we get to save ours for when theirs runs out.
You're welcome.



Unless we don't get a chance to use our own, because we have financed our own destruction by buying theirs.
WOLVERINES

Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Let a man vote to give himself a fish and he eats until society collapses.
User avatar
assateague
Emu hunter extraordinaire
 
Posts: 21277
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 12:25 pm
Location: Eastern Shore, People's Republic of Maryland

Re: US Oil Production/Consumption

Postby go get the bird » Mon Sep 23, 2013 11:13 am

SpinnerMan wrote:
tucker301 wrote:Saudi oil is cheap and plentiful, and we get to save ours for when theirs runs out.
You're welcome.

Unless it becomes obsolete. Then we have simply transferred our wealth unnecessarily to them.

Once those microbiologist figure out how to get bacteria to crap oil, and I think they may, and do it on an industrial scale at low cost, which I'm much more skeptical, we missed our opportunity.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22253746

Researchers genetically modified E. coli bacteria to convert sugar into an oil that is almost identical to conventional diesel.


They already have. Check out a company called Aquatech Bioenergy, LLC. They've begun the construction of a facility to start producing fuel commercially.

http://www.keloland.com/newsdetail.cfm?id=110342
MackieKnife wrote:The moral of the story is...I'm retarded.
User avatar
go get the bird
hunter
 
Posts: 2945
Joined: Tue Oct 18, 2011 1:12 pm

Re: US Oil Production/Consumption

Postby SpinnerMan » Mon Sep 23, 2013 11:59 am

go get the bird wrote:
SpinnerMan wrote:
tucker301 wrote:Saudi oil is cheap and plentiful, and we get to save ours for when theirs runs out.
You're welcome.

Unless it becomes obsolete. Then we have simply transferred our wealth unnecessarily to them.

Once those microbiologist figure out how to get bacteria to crap oil, and I think they may, and do it on an industrial scale at low cost, which I'm much more skeptical, we missed our opportunity.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22253746

Researchers genetically modified E. coli bacteria to convert sugar into an oil that is almost identical to conventional diesel.


They already have. Check out a company called Aquatech Bioenergy, LLC. They've begun the construction of a facility to start producing fuel commercially.

http://www.keloland.com/newsdetail.cfm?id=110342

I wish them well, but I wouldn't say they already have until they have already built their 10th plant, give or take a couple, without federal subsidies or special incentives.

Although ethanol is not a substitute for crude oil. It's a big piece, but not the whole pie.

BTW, even they admit they are not there.
"The Holy Grail of ethanol right now is 10,000 gallons. That's what everyone is shooting for a year. Algae right now is hoping for 2-6 thousand gallons an acre. We're hoping with this plan we can actually get close to 10,000 gallons or exceed it," Hagen said.

And Hagen thinks his ethanol can be produced for under a dollar a gallon.

I hope they exceed their wildest dreams, but most times they are wild-eyed optimists and reality bites them in the ass. Just not every time, and let's hope this is one of those times.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 15188
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: US Oil Production/Consumption

Postby tucker301 » Mon Sep 23, 2013 5:45 pm

Unless a frog has wings, he is likely to bump his ass now and again. :lol3:
tucker301
hunter
 
Posts: 4652
Joined: Fri Jul 09, 2010 1:58 pm

Re: US Oil Production/Consumption

Postby boney fingers » Mon Sep 23, 2013 6:09 pm

go get the bird wrote:
SpinnerMan wrote:
tucker301 wrote:Saudi oil is cheap and plentiful, and we get to save ours for when theirs runs out.
You're welcome.

Unless it becomes obsolete. Then we have simply transferred our wealth unnecessarily to them.

Once those microbiologist figure out how to get bacteria to crap oil, and I think they may, and do it on an industrial scale at low cost, which I'm much more skeptical, we missed our opportunity.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22253746

Researchers genetically modified E. coli bacteria to convert sugar into an oil that is almost identical to conventional diesel.


They already have. Check out a company called Aquatech Bioenergy, LLC. They've begun the construction of a facility to start producing fuel commercially.

http://www.keloland.com/newsdetail.cfm?id=110342



Turning food into fuel is foolishness.
boney fingers
hunter
 
Posts: 747
Joined: Sat Feb 18, 2012 6:30 pm

Re: US Oil Production/Consumption

Postby wanapasaki » Mon Sep 23, 2013 6:22 pm

Out of that 4,000,000,000 in imports how many are going towards the reserve or are implementing it? I'd much rather keep business within our own country ( drill here and now) rather than stimulating someone else economy. But just like Scaup said, if the price is right, buy it out while its cheap and available. I remember reading something along the lines that if we increased our refineries and their production levels two fold, about 10% of our estimated oil deposits will be touched in a 50 year span.
Give a man a duck... Feed him for a day... Teach him to fowl hunt... Feed him for a lifetime...Teach him in your spot... Learn to hunt a different spot....
User avatar
wanapasaki
hunter
 
Posts: 2295
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Tehachapi, CA

Re: US Oil Production/Consumption

Postby WoodyWhiffingMG » Tue Sep 24, 2013 5:59 am

wanapasaki wrote:Out of that 4,000,000,000 in imports how many are going towards the reserve or are implementing it?

The US Strategic Petroleum Reserve is a nearly a static amount with a capacity of 727 million barrels.

wanapasaki wrote: I'd much rather keep business within our own country ( drill here and now) rather than stimulating someone else economy. But just like Scaup said, if the price is right, buy it out while its cheap and available.

Agreed, but the upfront cost per barrel is not the only thing that should be taken into consideration.
Cost per barrel, jobs, funding our enemies, etc... There are a lot of factors that should effect where our oil comes from.


wanapasaki wrote:I remember reading something along the lines that if we increased our refineries and their production levels two fold, about 10% of our estimated oil deposits will be touched in a 50 year span.

I've not heard that, but I know we have well over 200 years in our domestic deposits.
User avatar
WoodyWhiffingMG
hunter
 
Posts: 7467
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 9:30 pm
Location: Back in SW MICHIGAN

Re: US Oil Production/Consumption

Postby WoodyWhiffingMG » Tue Sep 24, 2013 6:02 am

boney fingers wrote:
go get the bird wrote:
SpinnerMan wrote:
tucker301 wrote:Saudi oil is cheap and plentiful, and we get to save ours for when theirs runs out.
You're welcome.

Unless it becomes obsolete. Then we have simply transferred our wealth unnecessarily to them.

Once those microbiologist figure out how to get bacteria to crap oil, and I think they may, and do it on an industrial scale at low cost, which I'm much more skeptical, we missed our opportunity.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-22253746

Researchers genetically modified E. coli bacteria to convert sugar into an oil that is almost identical to conventional diesel.


They already have. Check out a company called Aquatech Bioenergy, LLC. They've begun the construction of a facility to start producing fuel commercially.

http://www.keloland.com/newsdetail.cfm?id=110342



Turning food into fuel is foolishness.



I would agree; there are people starving and we are using "excess" food to power our vehicles.
We are using our "excess" food to make fuel, and the cost of our "regularly" consumed foods is going up, which means that it was not "excess" in the first place.
User avatar
WoodyWhiffingMG
hunter
 
Posts: 7467
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 9:30 pm
Location: Back in SW MICHIGAN

Re: US Oil Production/Consumption

Postby aunt betty » Tue Sep 24, 2013 6:06 am

Oil is oil...is a falsehood.
The oil from middle east is sweet crude while the US shale oil deposits are not.

Learn a little bit about the business of refining crude oil and you'd see why this argument is such a poor one.

We are using the easy to refine oil up first and that...is a no-brainer decision.
INTERNET CREDIBILITY is...an OXYMORON. :moon:
User avatar
aunt betty
hunter
 
Posts: 9363
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 8:09 pm
Location: Go HOGS!

Re: US Oil Production/Consumption

Postby TomKat » Tue Sep 24, 2013 6:10 am

tucker301 wrote:Saudi oil is cheap and plentiful, and we get to save ours for when theirs runs out.
You're welcome.


THIS ^^^^^^^
Image
User avatar
TomKat
Dorothy
 
Posts: 11501
Joined: Mon Oct 18, 2010 11:18 am
Location: NE Kansas

Re: US Oil Production/Consumption

Postby WoodyWhiffingMG » Tue Sep 24, 2013 6:26 am

aunt betty wrote:Oil is oil...is a falsehood.
The oil from middle east is sweet crude while the US shale oil deposits are not.

Learn a little bit about the business of refining crude oil and you'd see why this argument is such a poor one.

We are using the easy to refine oil up first and that...is a no-brainer decision.


That is somewhat correct Betty, but the shale oil can be used to make diesel and in power production.
Which are now made out of "sweet" oil most of the time

Theoretically, the US holds enough deposits of both heavy and light crudes, to strategically provide for our own consumption.
User avatar
WoodyWhiffingMG
hunter
 
Posts: 7467
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 9:30 pm
Location: Back in SW MICHIGAN

Re: US Oil Production/Consumption

Postby B.E.Nelli » Tue Sep 24, 2013 6:41 am

WoodyWhiffingMG wrote:
aunt betty wrote:Oil is oil...is a falsehood.
The oil from middle east is sweet crude while the US shale oil deposits are not.

Learn a little bit about the business of refining crude oil and you'd see why this argument is such a poor one.

We are using the easy to refine oil up first and that...is a no-brainer decision.


That is somewhat correct Betty, but the shale oil can be used to make diesel and in power production.
Which are now made out of "sweet" oil most of the time

Theoretically, the US holds enough deposits of both heavy and light crudes, to strategically provide for our own consumption.


For how long "theoretically"? You are cutting off a lot of years worth of oil by cutting out the mid east. Why not extend our reserves as long as possible? I'd like my kids to be able to drive grandpas 57 Chevy someday.
User avatar
B.E.Nelli
hunter
 
Posts: 563
Joined: Sun Jul 28, 2013 11:13 am

Re: US Oil Production/Consumption

Postby WoodyWhiffingMG » Tue Sep 24, 2013 7:08 am

B.E.Nelli wrote:
WoodyWhiffingMG wrote:
aunt betty wrote:Oil is oil...is a falsehood.
The oil from middle east is sweet crude while the US shale oil deposits are not.

Learn a little bit about the business of refining crude oil and you'd see why this argument is such a poor one.

We are using the easy to refine oil up first and that...is a no-brainer decision.


That is somewhat correct Betty, but the shale oil can be used to make diesel and in power production.
Which are now made out of "sweet" oil most of the time

Theoretically, the US holds enough deposits of both heavy and light crudes, to strategically provide for our own consumption.


For how long "theoretically"? You are cutting off a lot of years worth of oil by cutting out the mid east. Why not extend our reserves as long as possible? I'd like my kids to be able to drive grandpas 57 Chevy someday.


I don’t think I said cut them off completely, but it is a little irresponsible to be freely giving up 5% of our GDP in a sector where we could be nearly if not completely self sufficient for the next 200 years. And to place all our bets that they will run out before we discover a legitimate replacement for crude in many sectors is foolish.
User avatar
WoodyWhiffingMG
hunter
 
Posts: 7467
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 9:30 pm
Location: Back in SW MICHIGAN

Re: US Oil Production/Consumption

Postby assateague » Tue Sep 24, 2013 7:14 am

B.E.Nelli wrote:
WoodyWhiffingMG wrote:
aunt betty wrote:Oil is oil...is a falsehood.
The oil from middle east is sweet crude while the US shale oil deposits are not.

Learn a little bit about the business of refining crude oil and you'd see why this argument is such a poor one.

We are using the easy to refine oil up first and that...is a no-brainer decision.


That is somewhat correct Betty, but the shale oil can be used to make diesel and in power production.
Which are now made out of "sweet" oil most of the time

Theoretically, the US holds enough deposits of both heavy and light crudes, to strategically provide for our own consumption.


For how long "theoretically"? You are cutting off a lot of years worth of oil by cutting out the mid east. Why not extend our reserves as long as possible? I'd like my kids to be able to drive grandpas 57 Chevy someday.



I'd like my kids to NOT die in some suicide bomber attack which was bought and paid for with our oil money. The economic argument is becoming a smaller and smaller portion of what the discussion should be about, in regard to domestic oil production.
WOLVERINES

Give a man a fish and he eats for a day. Let a man vote to give himself a fish and he eats until society collapses.
User avatar
assateague
Emu hunter extraordinaire
 
Posts: 21277
Joined: Tue Oct 06, 2009 12:25 pm
Location: Eastern Shore, People's Republic of Maryland

Re: US Oil Production/Consumption

Postby SpinnerMan » Tue Sep 24, 2013 7:49 am

China is not going to stop buying Middle East Oil. Oil is a very fungible world commodity. It does not matter who you buy it from. If you buy it, it helps ALL producers. Supply and Demand. Your demand raises their price regardless of who pumped it out of the ground :thumbsup:

Besides it's not like crazy needs a lot of oil to fund it.

Image

Did Iran get less crazy and less dangerous after their oil production collapsed and still remains 33% off of the high? :no:

One could argue that more oil production equals less crazies.

In fact, it is less crazies equals more oil production.

This funding terrorist arguments is just plain silly. Or more accurately, the notion is silly that even if the U.S. increased its oil output 10 fold and simultaneously cut our oil consumption 10 fold, it would make any noticeable difference on the number of crazies trying to kill us or in their capability to kill us.

There is no excuse for us to subsidize oil production in the U.S. and there is no excuse to suppress it either. Giving the bureaucrats in Washington that much power will do wildly more harm than any theoretical benefit from giving them the control. Let every state in the country decide. When it's in the oceans, common sense regulations, you know the ones Washington is so good at :lol3: :lol3: :lol3: :lol3:

If they weren't worried about spending $3,800,000,000,000 ($3.8 trillion so you don't have to count zeros) or $7,100,000,000 ($7.1 Billion) for every U.S. Congressmen most of which aren't competent to run a business with $7.1 thousand in receipts) or over $12,000 for every man, woman, and child living legally and illegally in the U.S. Just think how much thought you would put into spending $12,000, so you would get your money's worth. Now just think how much thought the Congress puts into spending over 300 million times that much money. It leaves them no time to do the things they must like creating sound regulations for inshore and offshore drilling for example or helping ensure international pipelines are built safely and efficiently. Actually Obama's goal wants to kill them, but he has to pretend otherwise, which he can when the government is insanely large and we have so many morons on both sides of the aisle.
A politician thinks of the next election; a statesman of the next generation. A politician looks for the success of his party; a statesman for that of the country. The statesman wished to steer, while the politician was satisfied to drift.
User avatar
SpinnerMan
hunter
 
Posts: 15188
Joined: Mon Dec 12, 2005 11:24 am
Location: Joliet, IL

Re: US Oil Production/Consumption

Postby aunt betty » Tue Sep 24, 2013 10:14 am

WoodyWhiffingMG wrote:
aunt betty wrote:Oil is oil...is a falsehood.
The oil from middle east is sweet crude while the US shale oil deposits are not.

Learn a little bit about the business of refining crude oil and you'd see why this argument is such a poor one.

We are using the easy to refine oil up first and that...is a no-brainer decision.


That is somewhat correct Betty, but the shale oil can be used to make diesel and in power production.
Which are now made out of "sweet" oil most of the time

Theoretically, the US holds enough deposits of both heavy and light crudes, to strategically provide for our own consumption.

At what cost?
Diesel used to be about 25% less than gasoline until we started using the Canadian crap.
When gas hit $2, diesel was $1.50. Remember?
INTERNET CREDIBILITY is...an OXYMORON. :moon:
User avatar
aunt betty
hunter
 
Posts: 9363
Joined: Fri Nov 19, 2010 8:09 pm
Location: Go HOGS!

Re: US Oil Production/Consumption

Postby WoodyWhiffingMG » Tue Sep 24, 2013 11:11 am

aunt betty wrote:
WoodyWhiffingMG wrote:
aunt betty wrote:Oil is oil...is a falsehood.
The oil from middle east is sweet crude while the US shale oil deposits are not.

Learn a little bit about the business of refining crude oil and you'd see why this argument is such a poor one.

We are using the easy to refine oil up first and that...is a no-brainer decision.


That is somewhat correct Betty, but the shale oil can be used to make diesel and in power production.
Which are now made out of "sweet" oil most of the time

Theoretically, the US holds enough deposits of both heavy and light crudes, to strategically provide for our own consumption.

At what cost?
Diesel used to be about 25% less than gasoline until we started using the Canadian crap.
When gas hit $2, diesel was $1.50. Remember?


There are lots of reasons for that, Betty...

Some demand related, those would be solved by using more US recovered crude, but a large part of the cost are from government intervention, making high sulfur (non-sweet crude) less feasible.

First, the price of diesel is pushed higher by strong demand outside of the U.S. The U.S. is a gasoline-dominant motor fuels market. 98 percent of passenger vehicles are powered by gasoline with fewer than 2 percent powered by diesel fuel. Consequently, the refining infrastructure is designed for optimum efficiency in producing gasoline. From a typical 42-gallon barrel of oil, the refining process delivers around 18 to 21 gallons of gasoline and 10 to 12 gallons of distillate (diesel fuel) plus some other refined products. Refinery yields can be tweaked but to produce significantly more distillate they would need to undergo significant upgrades costing billions.

Outside of the U.S. other countries are much more reliant on diesel. In Europe, for instance, diesel is used in the majority of new passenger vehicles sold there. Strong international demand for diesel --for both passenger vehicles and industrial machinery-- has placed a premium on diesel fuel imports.

Second, here in the U.S. the Energy Dept. says overall gas consumption has declined by 5 percent since 2004 while diesel demand has increased by 29 percent over the same period. In response, refineries have increased diesel production 15.1 percent, boosting diesel yield from a barrel of oil from 23.9% to 27.5%.

Third, the introduction of Ultra-Low Sulfur Diesel(ULSD),which was gradually phased into the market between 2006 and 2010 to replace the on-highway diesel fuel known as Low Sulfur Diesel(LSD) mandated by the Environmental Protection Agency, required approximately $8 billion in refinery infrastructure upgrades. Naturally, that cost was passed on to you, the consumer. The Ultra-Low Sulfur Diesel added about 10 cents a gallon to the cost.

Fourth are taxes. The federal tax on diesel is 24.4 cents per gallon, versus 18.4 cents for gasoline. The last increase was in the early '90s and that's when diesel was generally less expensive than gasoline.
Read more at http://blog.gasbuddy.com/posts/Why-dies ... ovtb5Cm.99
User avatar
WoodyWhiffingMG
hunter
 
Posts: 7467
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 9:30 pm
Location: Back in SW MICHIGAN

Re: US Oil Production/Consumption

Postby WoodyWhiffingMG » Tue Sep 24, 2013 11:17 am

SpinnerMan wrote:China is not going to stop buying Middle East Oil. Oil is a very fungible world commodity. It does not matter who you buy it from. If you buy it, it helps ALL producers. Supply and Demand. Your demand raises their price regardless of who pumped it out of the ground :thumbsup:

Besides it's not like crazy needs a lot of oil to fund it.

Image

Did Iran get less crazy and less dangerous after their oil production collapsed and still remains 33% off of the high? :no:

One could argue that more oil production equals less crazies.

In fact, it is less crazies equals more oil production.

This funding terrorist arguments is just plain silly. Or more accurately, the notion is silly that even if the U.S. increased its oil output 10 fold and simultaneously cut our oil consumption 10 fold, it would make any noticeable difference on the number of crazies trying to kill us or in their capability to kill us.

There is no excuse for us to subsidize oil production in the U.S. and there is no excuse to suppress it either. Giving the bureaucrats in Washington that much power will do wildly more harm than any theoretical benefit from giving them the control. Let every state in the country decide. When it's in the oceans, common sense regulations, you know the ones Washington is so good at :lol3: :lol3: :lol3: :lol3:

If they weren't worried about spending $3,800,000,000,000 ($3.8 trillion so you don't have to count zeros) or $7,100,000,000 ($7.1 Billion) for every U.S. Congressmen most of which aren't competent to run a business with $7.1 thousand in receipts) or over $12,000 for every man, woman, and child living legally and illegally in the U.S. Just think how much thought you would put into spending $12,000, so you would get your money's worth. Now just think how much thought the Congress puts into spending over 300 million times that much money. It leaves them no time to do the things they must like creating sound regulations for inshore and offshore drilling for example or helping ensure international pipelines are built safely and efficiently. Actually Obama's goal wants to kill them, but he has to pretend otherwise, which he can when the government is insanely large and we have so many morons on both sides of the aisle.


Would it reduce the amount of crazies, no.
Would it reduce the amount of money the crazies have, yes.

China imports more non-sweet oil than sweet oil.

And I am not saying the government should get more involved... I want them less involved.

China is not going to stop buying Middle East Oil. Oil is a very fungible world commodity. It does not matter who you buy it from. If you buy it, it helps ALL producers. Supply and Demand. Your demand raises their price regardless of who pumped it out of the ground :thumbsup:


Yes if the demand is increased the cost goes up, but not if supply goes up.
Are you really claiming that if we produced enough oil domestically the cost would not be affected?
If so, why is gas $0.67 there?
User avatar
WoodyWhiffingMG
hunter
 
Posts: 7467
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 9:30 pm
Location: Back in SW MICHIGAN

Next

Return to Controversial Issues Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests