Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[nenjin]

Truly, all you need to survive winter is booze and high fashion.

[mcclay]

In case you missed it, Several states are trying to take back much of the land that the federal government has snatched up over the years.

Energy: Lawmakers in resource-rich Western states have had enough of Washington's meddling and are moving to take the federal grip off their lands. Their actions could positively impact gasoline prices...

The movement is particularly relevant because in President Obama's feeble attempt to deflect blame for rising gasoline prices, he has repeatedly claimed that oil production has increased during his term. But what he has failed to mention is that the expansion has been on private lands. Production on federal land has fallen since he took office, due to his restrictive policies.

With Washington out of the way, the oil-rich states of New Mexico, Colorado, Utah and Montana can unlock their resources that have been trapped by Washington, which itself is captive to radical environmental interests.

Yeah, these guys sound pretty legit.  Clearly the reason gas prices have doubled since 2005 is because President Obama won't let those poor oil companies drill on land owned by the federal government since the 19th century or something.

But yes, most federal land is out in the Rockies.  That's because it assumed ownership of most of that land during the mid-1800s, and gave out huge tracts of land as an incentive to build railways, but there's only so many railways to build and it had a lot of useless mountains and deserts left over.  Useless until modern drill technology came along anyway, and anyone who's seen the rather bleak dreamscapes of endless natural gas wells on federal Colorado land can tell you they're neither "owned" by environmentalists, nor locked off to outside interests.

Pretty irrelevant all around though.  It sounds like Utah decided to ask for a bunch of federal granted to it, and the rest of the West jumped on the bandwagon.  Hey, whatever, if Nevada wants to directly own ungodly swaths of desert, I say let'em.  They have a point, if the federal government actually isn't doing anything with a piece of land, there's no reason for it to own it.

Of course, a huge swath of uninhabited Nevada is used by the Air Force to test blowing shit up. And yet more large swathes of those states are lands which are technically not part of the United States, but rather the various tribal nations that were forced onto reservations.

Heyyy Bro, I live in Nevada. We don't just have ungodly swaths of deserts, those deserts have plants and shit in them too. Also, if less of the land was owned by the feds I would have a lot more Airsoft fields to play at .

[Truean]

In case you missed it, Several states are trying to take back much of the land that the federal government has snatched up over the years.

Energy: Lawmakers in resource-rich Western states have had enough of Washington's meddling and are moving to take the federal grip off their lands. Their actions could positively impact gasoline prices...

The movement is particularly relevant because in President Obama's feeble attempt to deflect blame for rising gasoline prices, he has repeatedly claimed that oil production has increased during his term. But what he has failed to mention is that the expansion has been on private lands. Production on federal land has fallen since he took office, due to his restrictive policies.

With Washington out of the way, the oil-rich states of New Mexico, Colorado, Utah and Montana can unlock their resources that have been trapped by Washington, which itself is captive to radical environmental interests.

Yeah, these guys sound pretty legit.  Clearly the reason gas prices have doubled since 2005 is because President Obama won't let those poor oil companies drill on land owned by the federal government since the 19th century or something.

But yes, most federal land is out in the Rockies.  That's because it assumed ownership of most of that land during the mid-1800s, and gave out huge tracts of land as an incentive to build railways, but there's only so many railways to build and it had a lot of useless mountains and deserts left over.  Useless until modern drill technology came along anyway, and anyone who's seen the rather bleak dreamscapes of endless natural gas wells on federal Colorado land can tell you they're neither "owned" by environmentalists, nor locked off to outside interests.

Pretty irrelevant all around though.  It sounds like Utah decided to ask for a bunch of federal granted to it, and the rest of the West jumped on the bandwagon.  Hey, whatever, if Nevada wants to directly own ungodly swaths of desert, I say let'em.  They have a point, if the federal government actually isn't doing anything with a piece of land, there's no reason for it to own it.

Of course, a huge swath of uninhabited Nevada is used by the Air Force to test blowing shit up. And yet more large swathes of those states are lands which are technically not part of the United States, but rather the various tribal nations that were forced onto reservations.

Heyyy Bro, I live in Nevada. We don't just have ungodly swaths of deserts, those deserts have plants and shit in them too. Also, if less of the land was owned by the feds I would have a lot more Airsoft fields to play at .

OPEC controls 80% of the world's conventional oil supplies and is operating vastly under its production capacity. This is called an "Oligopoly," which is basically a monopoly with more than one person, but just as much clout. If the US drills more oil, then OPEC will drill less. The US can do nothing, nothing, to effect the supply of oil.

http://www.openfuelstandard.org/2012/04/npr-real-reason-gas-costs-4-gallon.html

We just have this national delusion that we're in control. [Laughs, just laughs and doesn't care....] Ours are the bites of arrogant ants against a great number of steel armored anteaters. Plus, we have speculators so the ants are eating each other while the anteaters come along too. Hurray !

[Africa]

Unfortunately, that national delusion may well well play into the hands the oil industry, which I firmly believe would love nothing more than to rip to shreds every bit of virgin wilderness this country has left that might possibly have some oil under it. And hey, it creates jobs!

The federal government may not be doing anything with the land, and as far as I'm concerned, that's A-OK. Huge tracts of "empty" BLM lands are a pretty essential part of America and I can't see much good coming from them being "developed."

[MetalSlimeHunt]

OPEC controls 80% of the world's conventional oil supplies and is operating vastly under its production capacity. This is called an "Oligopoly," which is basically a monopoly with more than one person, but just as much clout. If the US drills more oil, then OPEC will drill less. The US can do nothing, nothing, to effect the supply of oil.

http://www.openfuelstandard.org/2012/04/npr-real-reason-gas-costs-4-gallon.html

We just have this national delusion that we're in control. [Laughs, just laughs and doesn't care....] Ours are the bites of arrogant ants against a great number of steel armored anteaters. Plus, we have speculators so the ants are eating each other while the anteaters come along too. Hurray !

However, OPEC is playing the short game on this one. There is only so much oil for them to sell, and once theirs starts to run out the untapped US oil reserves will dominate the world oil market. That is, whatever of it is left by the time that happens (est. 2040).

[mainiac]

The economically recoverable american reserves are minimal.  It will be a long time before American generation passes Saudi generation.  And by 2040 we will either be using something else to power our vehicles or be living in post nuclear fallout.

[Nadaka]

The economically recoverable american reserves are minimal.  It will be a long time before American generation passes Saudi generation.  And by 2040 we will either be using something else to power our vehicles or be living in post nuclear fallout.

Meh, we can manage a half dozen different kinds of apocalyptic horror before we need to go nuclear.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

The economically recoverable american reserves are minimal.

Right now. In 2040 oil recovery technology will have improved, no doubt.   

And by 2040 we will either be using something else to power our vehicles or be living in post nuclear fallout.

I'm not thinking about vehicles. I'm thinking about plastics and farming. There are many uses for oil.

[Karlito]

There's been some controversy over the years in Nevada over the BLM's management of the wild horse herds, and various other things. I don't really think the state would do a better job though, so whatever.

[mainiac]

The economically recoverable american reserves are minimal.

Right now. In 2040 oil recovery technology will have improved, no doubt.   

And by 2040 we will either be using something else to power our vehicles or be living in post nuclear fallout.

I'm not thinking about vehicles. I'm thinking about plastics and farming. There are many uses for oil.

Oil technology will improve but other technologies will have improved too.  But oil will be in less exploitable places which won't affect other power sources nearly as much.

I agree that plastics will be the primary use but I think you over-estimate the scale of oil use of plastics.  They're only like 10% of oil use IIRC and we can generate them from things besides oil.  If US oil production is past Saudi production then we are probably in a world where we are using less plastic and making it from things besides oil.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

I think you're crazy. The plastic business will only grow as the years go by. Plastic is the new steel and the new wood in one, and that's not even considering the things that it is the one and only material for. Unless something game changing comes along plastics are going to grow exponentially; far too large a growth for non-oil plastic production to keep up with in the next few decades. After that, maybe, but not in the 2020-2040 range.

[mainiac]

Plastic got so big on a glut of cheap oil.  In the past few years the huge growth has tapered off.  If Saudi oil is depleted, plastics will either stagnate in production or shift to other inputs.

[Leafsnail]

Why will future oil extraction technology benefit only the US and not the current oil producing countries?

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Canada would definitely see some benefit, but most of that market is already directed towards the US anyway. OPEC is going to use most of what they have by the time new technology comes about and won't react well to the strife once their markets run out of product. This will prevent them from accessing the new technologies very well. They need oil to survive economically, but the US doesn't. Saudi Arabia is in a particularly bad spot, as barring the development of low-energy desalination the whole Middle East is going to be involved in water wars in a few decades.

Ultimately, the US's untapped oil combined with Canada's giant supply will end up dominating the market. Which will then promptly crash for good as the last of the profitable oil is spent in 2040-2070.

[mainiac]

the whole Middle East is going to be involved in water wars in a few decades.

I would bet money that this will not come to pass.