April 30, 2004

News > Known Saudi Arabian Oil Reserves Tripled

Saudia Arabia just announced that their known oil reserves are three times as much as previously believed. Link.

There are good reasons for reducing our petroleum usage, such as smog and reliance on foreign governments. However, as I've said before, I no longer worry about running out of oil any time soon. All of the predictions of impending oil depletion turn out to be wrong. What's more, in many cases older, depleted oil wells are re-filling.

Posted by lesjones



Comments

I quit listening to the ecohysterians years ago, but the theory about oil originating from a subterranian biosphere is new to me. But even if we (finally) deplete oil reserves, there's always the promise of thermal depolymerization.

Posted by: AlphaPatriot at May 02, 2004

Some very wild changes of late in the oil reserves news.

I've been reading up on Global Energy Reserves ever since I discovered that Canadian Oil Reserves jumped from 5 bbl to 180 bbl in 2003 because of the inclusion of the oil sands (which are now being developed and contributing significantly) This put Canada at 2nd place in the world with proven reserves. Alberta's oil industry thinks that the ultimately recoverable oil sands reserves could prove to be 300 bbl.

So because of the Canadian oil sands inclusion in global reserves, the global reserve levels jumped from 1000 bbl in 2001 to 1200 bbl in 2003.

Now not only do we have the Saudi's claiming that they have *another* 1000 bbl, but I've just found this interesting link:

http://www.mosnews.com/money/2004/04/30/oilreserves.shtml

As Russian companies start stating their reserves (which with the help of Western oil companies have been exploring like mad), Russia's reserve numbers are shooting up and may approach Saudia Arabia's old 200 bbl reserve numbers.

The thing that really makes my head dizzy is that I was just this minute (before I came above the story you have and the Russian story), I was reading an article written just ONE MONTH AGO that brought into serious doubt the Saudi reserve situation!!

Take a look at this:

http://www.iags.org/n0331043.htm

I'm not sure what to make of it all.

Remember the "oil shale" deposits that were being developed in Colorado in the 80's? There are actually 2000 bbl of potential there - however it turns out that extracting it results in oil priced at 60 dollars per barrel, so in the late 80's the whole oil shale thing went tits up (bust).

*But* if we ever do end up with oil in short supply, there is always that 2000 bbl of oil shale. And the Canadian oil sands is actually pegged at 1200 bbl, it's just that at 30 dollars per barrel, only 200-300 bbl is economically recoverable.

So let's look at things worst case to best case.

2001, with Saudi reserves in doubt:

- 1000 bbl reserves, 20-30 year supply at current usage projections

2004, with new Saudi, Russian, and Canadian figures, not including currently uneconomical oil sands and shale:

- 2600 bbl reserves

Including all of the oil sands and shale, assuming oil prices reach prices so high that extraction becomes economical for it all

- 5600 bbl reserves

Even with 20 percent increase in usage rate by 2020 (50 bbl per year), we end up with 110 years supply of oil.

As a nice byproduct of high oil prices, there will be great incentives for non-carbon fuel sources (solar, wind, wave, nuclear, etc), which will help reduce our greenhouse gas emissions and prevent that old nasty 5 deg C temperature increase.

Personally I stopped worrying too much about the greenhouse effect thing when someone pointed out that if we spend 100 years in economic ruin trying to prevent something from happening that we have no real certainty will happen or is happening for a given reason, and then we discover say ultra cheap solar cells or cold fusion - well it'd be pretty damn stupid of us, eh? I mean, imagine how much technological develompent will have occured in the NEXT 100 years?

Don't get me wrong, I love the idea of solar and wind power just out of basic principles. If we can reduce human C02 levels without killing the economy, it'd be nice. (Don't piss in your own backyard, you know?).

Posted by: Craig at May 09, 2004

Check out the recent advances in supercondutor technologies. WWW.AMSUPER.COM

Posted by: Rook Wetzel at January 11, 2005

- The deep oil stuff is pretty dubious...not many people believe it. Even if it is real, it won't rush up in time to change things.

- The thing to remember is not that there won't be energy, only that energy will become quite a bit more expensive. That changes the economic picture quite a lot. Conventional oil is great, cheap to produce, and packs a great deal of energy. Oil shales, etc., also have a ton of energy, but are never going to be nearly as cheap to produce as conventional sources. This will change our lifestyles, and industry. Trade will also be impacted, since it runs on cheap oil as well.

Posted by: Joe at April 20, 2005

This is my first entry to the debate.
im told that even if the oil runs out there is
liquified natural gas in abundance which will solve any energy problem.
So does anyone know how much?
and does anyone know the true figure of oil reserves? or are we all guessing.

Posted by: harry at June 10, 2005

that might supply some of the energy shortfall but keep in mind that hydrocarbon derivitives (stuff made out of oil) include basically all --plastics--, polymers, etc. basically the vast majority of everything synthethic can be traced back to oil (well, I'd guess 80%)

Posted by: paradigmflux at June 27, 2005

Gasoline and Oil
Saudi Arabi vs Canada We buy most of our oil from everbody but Canada
Canadian Reseves are in ouir back yard but Major oil companies would not see this as a benefit to them as it would increase supply and decrease both our dependence on THE MIDDLE EAST AND their prices.
George "the oilman" Bush and BIG DICK CHENEY , HALLIBUTON Exxon's little puppet.
It is cost effective to drill oil in western Canada for $18.50-$20.00 per barrel.
Why are we all over the worl THE MIDDLE EAST
and not have an energy pact with Canada
George Bush Sr does not represenr Canada, HE OFFICIALLY REPRESENTED THE SAUDI'S
Wake up America, AND ALL NEWS MEDIA THAT ACT LIKE 13 YEAR OLDS FOLLOWING THE BEETLES THEN ASKING TOUGH QUESTIONS AND DOING RESEARCH
I TOLD YOU 20 YEARS AGO YOU WILL BE PAYING OVER $2.00 PER GALL FOR GASOLINE AND FUEL OIL
THEY ALL LAUGHED THEN
NOW I GET THE LAST LAUGH BUT I WILL REFRAIN. It is not funny and there is plenty of blame.
If you want the reest of the story feel free and I can show you how to go back to $1.15 per gallon

Regards,

Gene Leahy

Posted by: Gene Leahy at September 26, 2005

Gasoline and Oil
Saudi Arabi vs Canada We buy most of our oil from everbody but Canada
Canadian Reseves are in ouir back yard but Major oil companies would not see this as a benefit to them as it would increase supply and decrease both our dependence on THE MIDDLE EAST AND their prices.
George "the oilman" Bush and BIG DICK CHENEY , HALLIBUTON Exxon's little puppet.
It is cost effective to drill oil in western Canada for $18.50-$20.00 per barrel.
Why are we all over the worl THE MIDDLE EAST
and not have an energy pact with Canada
George Bush Sr does not represenr Canada, HE OFFICIALLY REPRESENTED THE SAUDI'S
Wake up America, AND ALL NEWS MEDIA THAT ACT LIKE 13 YEAR OLDS FOLLOWING THE BEETLES THEN ASKING TOUGH QUESTIONS AND DOING RESEARCH
I TOLD YOU 20 YEARS AGO YOU WILL BE PAYING OVER $2.00 PER GALL FOR GASOLINE AND FUEL OIL
THEY ALL LAUGHED THEN
NOW I GET THE LAST LAUGH BUT I WILL REFRAIN. It is not funny and there is plenty of blame.
If you want the reest of the story feel free and I can show you how to go back to $1.15 per gallon

Regards,

Gene Leahy

Posted by: Gene Leahy at September 26, 2005

u guys r bad to the bone!

Posted by: at February 15, 2006
Post a comment










Remember personal info?







Terms of Use