US to become biggest oil producer before 2020

[william the wie]

I wonder what the authors mean by "biggest oil producer". It seems to me that even at the volumes projected by the EIA, Russia and Saudi Arabia will still be making more…are doing so today.

What does appear to be happening is that the EIA is signaling that the US might be able to achieve the same levels of oil production they once did in the early 70's.

This actually does have its own importance. Such increased production is currently negating the value of Hubbert's bell shaped curve profile in its entirety, in such a way that even the moronic peak oilers would understand, and should US production achieve the levels last seen in the early 70's it would take down his last standing prediction from his 1956 paper (the others having already been dispatched by reality).

Those who have noted that a commodity like oil, sold on a global market, will not change the prices Americans pay for their products manufactured from crude oil, are probably right. America could produce 15 million a day, and as long as the global demand was there, the price probably wouldn't move much at all for anyone.

The US and Canada produce the marginal barrels of oil on the planet, and therefore the cost of that production will set the global price for as long as they are needed.

Actually the US has been the largest or second largest oil and NG producer pretty much from the start of the transition away from coal. Russia and KSA combined produce 6% more than the US.

 

[Politico]

Does this hurt our attempt to limit co2 emissions? Or is the moving to natural gas from coal more then make room for it.

Who cares. Drill baby drill.

 

[Mr. H.]

Does this hurt our attempt to limit co2 emissions? Or is the moving to natural gas from coal more then make room for it.

It certainly won't stop the EPA from their witch hunt on all things carbon.

Nor the Leftie-Loonies in their campaign to "green up" America.

 

[RGR]

Good for the industry and for the administration: keep it up.

The administration has nothing to do with it. But the current price of oil certainly does.

 

[RGR]

But unless more mid-stream infrastructure is built out to accommodate, the spread between WTI and Brent could only worsen.

Only if volumes continue to increase. To date they have been able to get oil out of the Bakken and Eagleford fine, sooner or later they will run out of railcars and pipelines and whatnot, and then they will have to take a break, allow come decline to run its course, and then continue at a reduced pace.

However, unlike building out an electrical distribution infrastructure to handle a occasional peak load, the oil industry doesn't like doing this because of the aforementioned natural decline. They will want enough..but not too much.

It will be interesting to see what they deem is "enough" for the continued development of these resources.

Americans have been paying a discount for crudes for some time now. Upwards to $25/barrel discount to Brent. It's a shame as industry could be reinvesting even more capital here at home.

They could, assuming they have the upstream infrastructure such as rigs and crews and whatnot. The oil industry in the US being about as free market as any industry on the planet, they'll sort it out in one logical way or another.

 

[RGR]

Does this hurt our attempt to limit co2 emissions?

The US currently has no limit on CO2 emissions, so the question is irrelevant. Certainly as of late the US has been emitting less, but this is more because of the transition to cheap and plentiful natural gas rather than any legal, moral, or dreamed up by Greenpeace "limit" on emissions.

Or is the moving to natural gas from coal more then make room for it.

I agree, drill baby drill for natural gas. And oil too because on a BTU basis it is worth quite a bit more.

 

[RGR]

I
Actually the US has been the largest or second largest oil and NG producer pretty much from the start of the transition away from coal. Russia and KSA combined produce 6% more than the US.

And what date might that have happened? In 1825 when natural gas started to be used in the United States? The US might certainly be the largest NG producer on the planet, I was referring to oil.

 

[SteadyMercury]

Obama?

Seriously, I don't know what is more pathetic the people who blame him for shit he didn't do or people who credit him for shit he didn't do.

 

[william the wie]

I
Actually the US has been the largest or second largest oil and NG producer pretty much from the start of the transition away from coal. Russia and KSA combined produce 6% more than the US.

And what date might that have happened? In 1825 when natural gas started to be used in the United States? The US might certainly be the largest NG producer on the planet, I was referring to oil.

For the majority of uses the two energy sources are interchangeable except for small power plants and besides fracking also produces oil in large quantities. Although the largest reserves of NG could well be in Russia since they get a higher percentage of NG from their fields than we do.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Good for the industry and for the administration: keep it up.

The administration has nothing to do with it. But the current price of oil certainly does.

You truly do not understand if you believe that, but it's your ticket: punch it.

 

[elektra]

Obama describes the use of oil as an addiction.

 

[JimH52]

Obama describes the use of oil as an addiction.

And that is what it is. I suppose it galls all the pro W people out there when during the Obama administration, US oil production is at the heights that it is. I am sorry that upsets you...

 

[RGR]

And what date might that have happened? In 1825 when natural gas started to be used in the United States? The US might certainly be the largest NG producer on the planet, I was referring to oil.

For the majority of uses the two energy sources are interchangeable except for small power plants and besides fracking also produces oil in large quantities. Although the largest reserves of NG could well be in Russia since they get a higher percentage of NG from their fields than we do.

Yeah, now you've really got me confused.Oil and gas are not interchangable for a majority of people, particularly considering that most oil goes into transport,and most natural gas does not. Hydraulic fracturing is a process that allows what would normally be uneconomic volumes of oil, gas and water to be recovered to be economic.

And Russia, Qatar and Iran would be the three countries on the planet that have gas reserves and resources out the wazoo, and I'm not sure what Russian GOR's are from all their fields but I don't expect them to be that different from GORs in similar fields anywhere else on the planet. If in fact what you are referring to is GOR and not something else, which is where the confusion comes in because you haven't been very clear.

 

[RGR]

Good for the industry and for the administration: keep it up.

The administration has nothing to do with it. But the current price of oil certainly does.

You truly do not understand if you believe that, but it's your ticket: punch it.

It is always possible I do not understand a topic. 10+ years in industry as a petroleum engineer, 15 years as a staff scientist and subject matter expert on upstream petroleum resource and development issues and my third career as an analyst and modeler on domestic and international oil and gas resource volumes and costs means my economic training on this issues is not as complete as I'd like.

You might suffer from ignorance when it comes to the practical application of a cost curve, I do not.

 

[JakeStarkey]

The administration has nothing to do with it. But the current price of oil certainly does.

You truly do not understand if you believe that, but it's your ticket: punch it.

It is always possible I do not understand a topic. 10+ years in industry as a petroleum engineer, 15 years as a staff scientist and subject matter expert on upstream petroleum resource and development issues and my third career as an analyst and modeler on domestic and international oil and gas resource volumes and costs means my economic training on this issues is not as complete as I'd like.

You might suffer from ignorance when it comes to the practical application of a cost curve, I do not.

None of that matters, for I was writing petro tech manuals almost 35 years ago in Alaska for the military, so peddle it elsewhere. If you think that admin policy does not matter, then you should not be working in the field. Peddle that nonsense elsewhere, because it does not float here. It's your ticket, and you just punched it.

 

[RGR]

You truly do not understand if you believe that, but it's your ticket: punch it.

It is always possible I do not understand a topic. 10+ years in industry as a petroleum engineer, 15 years as a staff scientist and subject matter expert on upstream petroleum resource and development issues and my third career as an analyst and modeler on domestic and international oil and gas resource volumes and costs means my economic training on this issues is not as complete as I'd like.

You might suffer from ignorance when it comes to the practical application of a cost curve, I do not.

None of that matters, for I was writing petro tech manuals almost 35 years ago in Alaska for the military, so peddle it elsewhere.

Yes...petro tech manuals, that is exactly the kind of career that leads to running oil and gas development projects stretching into a capital budget measured in billions of dollars. Silly me, if I had only known that writing a petro manual for the military would imbue me with these talents, I would have ever had to do the actual training and work to learn how!

If you think that admin policy does not matter, then you should not be working in the field. Peddle that nonsense elsewhere, because it does not float here. It's your ticket, and you just punched it.

If you think that administration policy on federal lands where most of the new oil and gas ISN'T coming from is more relevant than price, stick to writing petro manuals for those huge producers of natural gas and oil, the military. Anyone stupid enough to not understand that $100 oil changes the point along the cost curve where spending $10M per well becomes suddenly wildly profitable compared to $50 oil deserves exactly the experience you've just outlined.

 

[elektra]

Obama describes the use of oil as an addiction.

And that is what it is. I suppose it galls all the pro W people out there when during the Obama administration, US oil production is at the heights that it is. I am sorry that upsets you...

The price of gas is the highest its ever been for the longest time.

If you increase the rate at which you build Wind Turbines and Solar Power plants you must increase oil production to provide the massive increase in demand for raw materials that only heavy industry can provided.

The USA is not being allowed to prosper at our full potential, at best we are all living off the crumbs that the baby boomers drop to us. We are draining that massive amount of wealth from the baby boomers, our economy is now their Health Care and Government controlled housing.

The USA can be much more than it is today, we should lead the world in research and development off all industries, from textiles to nuclear power.

We should produce so much we export to Canada, not import, both Oil and Electricity.

As it is the states like Michigan and Ohio depend on Canada for electricity. States like California which claims to be the number 6 or 7 economy in the world must import electricity.

Cities like Detroit that were the Heavy Industry leader of the world, the sixth largest economy, a city, is now dead and gone.

Your claim of Obama's accomplishments is at best a sad disappointment in comparison to the potential of our Great Country.

 

[william the wie]

For the majority of uses the two energy sources are interchangeable except for small power plants and besides fracking also produces oil in large quantities. Although the largest reserves of NG could well be in Russia since they get a higher percentage of NG from their fields than we do.

Yeah, now you've really got me confused.Oil and gas are not interchangable for a majority of people, particularly considering that most oil goes into transport,and most natural gas does not. Hydraulic fracturing is a process that allows what would normally be uneconomic volumes of oil, gas and water to be recovered to be economic.

And Russia, Qatar and Iran would be the three countries on the planet that have gas reserves and resources out the wazoo, and I'm not sure what Russian GOR's are from all their fields but I don't expect them to be that different from GORs in similar fields anywhere else on the planet. If in fact what you are referring to is GOR and not something else, which is where the confusion comes in because you haven't been very clear.

Assuming GOR means Gas, Oil, Reserves then you read me right. Coal seams that are too expensive to mine for coal generally are cheap enough to drill for natural gas. In Russia as in the US too expensive to mine coal fields have been used as gas fields for a long time. But in Russia because of latitude, size and poorer logistical endowment a much higher percentage of coal fields fall into to the too expensive to mine but not too expensive to use as gas fields category. Australia for example uses the same technique, primarily to make coal mining cheaper and safer and then found that it had a lot of NG and other gases that they need a market for.

 

[Jughead]

Speaking of oil, there is also the Keystone XL pipeline project. The Obama administration appears to not want to get involved with this due to greenhouse gas emissions concerns. The project would consist of a 36-inch-diameter crude oil pipeline which would transport oil from Hardisty, Alberta (Canadian oil Sands), south through five U.S. states to oil refineries on the Gulf Coast in Texas. The project would create a significant number of well paying jobs for Americans.

Obama comments on Keystone spark ire, more concerns about project?s future | Fox News

The Republican National Committee said in a statement Monday: “President Obama joked about the potential job creating power of the Keystone XL pipeline. With our economy lagging, the president should be jumping at any opportunity to create jobs instead of bending to the will of special (interests) at the expense of out of work Americans.”

 

[elektra]

US to become biggest Oil Producer is the topic, pure speculation based on what, making Obama look good. Well, during Obama's rule as a tyrannical President;

We are not the World's Largest Producer of Oil

Speculation as to what happens to U.S. Oil Production years from now and who gets political credit is a Fool's Debate