Thursday, May 19, 2011

North America's Oil Reserves!

*******
The Tar Sands Campaign and the Suppression of North America’s Energy Potential
Environmentalism is attacking Alberta’s oil sands industry
William Walter Kay
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
http://canadafreepress.com/index.php/article/36663
*******
*******
Environmentalism is attacking Alberta’s oil sands industry. Their “Tar Sands” campaign is best understood when placed within the grand crusade to suppress North America’s energy potential.
Canada and USA have combined oil reserves of several trillion barrels. Over 2 trillion barrels are recoverable with existing technology at current prices. Combined Canadian and American petroleum consumption is 10 billion barrels a year. These countries possess centuries of oil supply.
The oil sands are not the only oil reserve besieged by environmentalists. The kerogen beds of Colorado, the conventional oil reservoirs under the Alaska National Wildlife Refuge, and the deposits off British Columbia’s coast are among the many mammoth reserves kept from development by environmentalists.
*******
*******
The “Tar Sands” campaign involves hundreds of environmental groups animated with millions of dollars from a few dozen foundations, corporations, and government agencies. Between 2006 and 2011 these groups planted 4,000 misinformation-laden anti-oil sands articles into the mainstream media.
10% of the oil imported into North America comes through two dynasties, the Irvings and the Pews – both major benefactors of environmentalism.
A 2011 US Chamber of Commerce report identified 351 environmentalist activist campaigns blocking specific American energy proposals. The Sierra Club was leading over 100 local campaigns against coal-fired electricity. Solar power industry front man, David Gelbaum, gave the Sierra Club $200 million.
*******
High Gas Prices are Part of the Plan
Process of leasing, evaluating, drilling, and developing an oil or natural gas field typically takes five to ten years
Institute for Energy Research
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
It is not too difficult to understand President Obama’s point of view on energy. When he first took office, he was given the opportunity to select a new Secretary of Energy. He chose Steven Chu, who had just been quoted in the Wall Street Journal saying that “somehow we have to figure out how to boost the price of gasoline to the levels in Europe.” Currently, a gallon of gasoline in Europe will set you back over $8.
Then, faced with the decision of who to place in charge of the Department of Interior, which controls much of America’s vast energy resources, he chose a senator who went on record to oppose any new drilling in the Outer Continental Shelf, even if gasoline prices reached $10 per gallon.
President Obama chose to surround himself with anti-energy advocates that view affordable energy as a problem, not a solution
President Obama chose to surround himself with anti-energy advocates that view affordable energy as a problem, not a solution. So it is important to keep that in mind as you watch him and members of his administration as they attempt to handle the current crisis of rising energy costs. While they act as though affordable energy is the goal, observers must remember how these activists deliberately fought for higher energy prices before the public spotlight was shining so brightly on them.
Yesterday’s Senate Energy and Natural Resources hearing with Secretary Ken Salazar and BOEMRE director Michael Bromwich is a perfect example. Salazar’s testimony wasted no time before taking credit for last year’s uptick in domestic oil production. However, a 2008 letter to Congress from Ken Green, the president of the American Association of Petroleum Geologists, explains that “the process of leasing, evaluating, drilling, and developing an oil or natural gas field typically takes five to ten years.”
That means that most wells producing today are the result of leases granted under the Bush and Clinton administrations. To judge the Obama Administration’s success in promoting domestic oil and gas production, one must look years down the road from his inauguration in 2009. Judging from the Energy Information Administration’s projections for the Gulf of Mexico, the president’s policies are having the opposite effect of what he would like us to believe.
Then Salazar turned his attention to the leases that are not currently producing oil or gas: he complains that 70 percent of offshore leases and 57 percent of onshore leases are “inactive.” While he never explains why companies would simply sit on leases for which they paid huge amounts of money, he insists that companies need “incentives” to speed things up.
This is the same tired argument that was used in 2008 and again earlier this year. While Salazar seems ignorant of the facts, his colleague Michael Bromwich was exactly right when he recently testified that companies are “doing well” if they find oil on one out of every three offshore leases.
The reality is that not every lease contains oil or gas. The same report that Salazar is citing notes that “producing acres as a percentage of leased acres have averaged about 30% over the past ten years.” After millions of dollars of investment, companies may find no resources to produce. Or they may find that, at current prices, the resources would not be economically viable to extract from the ground. Unless Secretary Salazar wants to foot the bill for exploration and tell bidders which leases contain resources and which do not, there will continue to be a lot of very expensive dry holes as there have been for 150 years of drilling.
The Obama Administration is desperately trying to deflect blame for the rising price of energy
Even if companies do believe that they can find oil, the lease cannot be considered ‘active’ until the company
receives the dozens of necessary permits to explore for energy. The Obama Administration’s withholding of permits is well documented and has even resulted in a contempt order from U.S. District Judge Martin Feldman. In the past year, they have issued only one new deepwater drilling permit. Unless the administration starts issuing more permits, many leases are forced to remain in the ‘inactive’ category.
The Obama Administration is desperately trying to deflect blame for the rising price of energy. Gone are the days when they could openly speak about the need to make energy prices “necessarily skyrocket.” Now that they are under the glare of public opinion, the president and his allies are singing a new song. But make no mistake about it—as global demand grows, the administration is restricting our energy potential and putting us at the mercy of state-owned energy companies that are inimical to American values. Unless the Obama Administration reverses course on their anti-energy agenda, they will continue to put us at a long term disadvantage to the developing nations of the world
The Institute for Energy Research (IER) is a not-for-profit organization that conducts intensive research and analysis on the functions, operations, and government regulation of global energy markets. IER maintains that freely-functioning energy markets provide the most efficient and effective solutions to today’s global energy and environmental challenges and, as such, are critical to the well-being of individuals and society.
*******
Also See:
Oil—Our Greatest Natural Renewable Energy Source
09 September 2010
http://arcticcompass.blogspot.com/2010/09/oilour-greatest-natural-renewable.html
and
Canada, Not United States, has More Oil than the Entire Middle East!!
17 March 2010
http://arcticcompass.blogspot.com/2010/03/united-staes-has-more-oil-than-entire.html
and
Oil - Have We Been Taken to the Cleaners or What?
04 February 2008
http://arcticcompass.blogspot.com/2008/02/have-we-been-taken-to-cleaners-or-what.html
*******