View Single Post
Old 04-23-08 | 09:17 AM
  #162  
GGDub's Avatar
GGDub
Dog is my copilot.
 
Joined: Oct 2005
Posts: 802
Likes: 0
From: Calgary, Alberta

Bikes: Lemond Maillot Jaune, Specialized Stumpjumper, Kona Jake the Snake, Single-Speed Rigid Rocky Mtn Equipe, Soon-to-be fixed Bianchi Brava

Originally Posted by Voodoo76
Good thought, although increase in nukes will have a significant time lag as well. At any rate we have to get started.

Looks like the holes in N Dakota or Montana (Bakken Field) may be more productive than Alaska anyway. Hopefully the USGS estimates there are correct, and we finally understand that this is just buying us time to come up with the real solution.
I'm currently working the Bakken right now, in Montana, ND and Saskatchewan. There's a lot of oil there, but it ain't cheap to recover and while I say there's a lot, a lot still isn't enough to supply the U.S. market for more than a year.

The oil sands are where the huge reserves are, too bad it requires far too much water to extract the oil, and sooner or later, people are going to want that water to drink.

Bottom line, sometime in my lifetime or the next generations lifetime, cheap oil will no longer be available (yes, $120/bbl oil is still cheap).
GGDub is offline  
Reply