New York Times (November 2010) -
Just as it seemed that the world was running on fumes, giant oil fields were discovered off the coasts of Brazil and Africa, and Canadian oil sands projects expanded so fast, they now provide North America with more oil than Saudi Arabia. In addition, the United States has increased domestic oil production for the first time in a generation.
Moreover -
With rising production from shale fields, the U.S. surpassed Russia last year to become the world’s largest supplier of natural gas. [1]
[1] North America: The new energy kingdom (theglobeandmail.com)
Posts
Like all alternatives to liquid oil reserviors that I have researched so far, I've read of a few catches to oil shale and sand. 1) Much of this sand and shale is located in geographically difficult locations, increasing costs of extraction in the first place. 2) Transportation costs are tricky because the sand cannot simply be piped to refineries. 3) Sand and shale are "dirty" sources of petroleum that require more time and electricity to refine than crude oil from reservior deposits. All of these problems increase the price of such oil, delay its entry into the market, and degrade the net amount of energy that is actually produced.
ReplyDeleteOn the bright side, there is quite a lot of oil sand and shale within the North American continent. Combined with synthesized coal gas (also slow and costly), America has a source of oil in addition to offshore platforms or overseas sources.
Yes, BMR unconventional crude is more expensive, but what world leaders have to adjudge is whether it is so expensive it would cripple the world economy. The last time I checked, Canadian oil sands become satisfactorily profitable to the Canadians with gasoline for sale at $4.00 per gallon. That $4.00 per gallon price includes the cost of them developing the sands to the point that it in the form of crude deliverable by pipeline (already occurring). The ultra-green Canadian are eager to develop the oil sands because it means desperately needed jobs and money but there is strong international environmental opposition to Canadian plans.
ReplyDeleteTen years ago $4.00 per gallon would have caused a worldwide economic depression, but as time goes by, $4.00 per gallon becomes more feasible for the world economies. And $4.00 per gallon looks like a far better deal than ethanol.