NEWS: Rand Corp Study: U.S. has enough oil for 400 years!

The noted Rand Corporation "think tank" released a press statement, dated September 2, 2005, summarizing a study of U.S. Oil reserves. The study revealed a huge potential oil reserve in the American Midwest. holds The Rand Report stated that the United States has oil reserves that could amount to over one billion barrels. This would be more than three times the reserves of oil that Saudi Arabia holds! This massive reserve of oil is currently locked in vast shale oil fields which, when extracted, could provide the United States with a considerable percentage of it's petro-energy needs for the next several centuries! Potentially, this could make the United States energy independent though it will come at a cost.



Although this statement is encouraging and holds a great deal of promise for the United States' future energy concerns, it does raise the issue that the search for technological advances in the extraction of oil from shale as well as from alternative sources is crucial. Nevertheless, this Rand Corporation study offers some optimism for America's "Peak Oil" fears and concerns.

According to the report, the reserves would be sufficient to supply a considerable percentage of America's energy needs for 400 years! Of course, the energy; gasoline, fuel oil and other petro-based fuels, won't be cheap. In fact, it is the current upward spiral of oil costs that even make the extraction of oil from shale feasible. However, the technology presently exists to be able to extract and supply oil from shale and new technologies loom on the horizon which could make the United States self sufficient for quite some time in the future.

Perhaps the current $70 +/barrel price is a mixed blessing. On the short term, this cost is certainly detrimental to the American economy. Of course, one of the factors is the phenomical spike that we have seen in the oil market due, in part, to the Iraq War and the effects of Hurricane Katrina on Gulf oil production and gasoline refineries. The prices rose too quickly for the economy to stabilize. It remains an unstable situation. However, on the horizon, this study points towards a viable and sustainable source of petro-energy for a considerable time period -- a period that could sustain the American economy until viable energy alternatives are found.

Related News Links:
www.washingtonpost.com
www.deseretnews.com
www.seattletimes.nwsource.com
www.gulf-news.com

[edit on 9/8/2005 by benevolent tyrant]

[edit on 9/8/2005 by benevolent tyrant]

[edit on 9/8/2005 by benevolent tyrant]

[edit on 9/8/2005 by benevolent tyrant]

The oil companies have been burned before by trying to develop these resources during times of high oil prices only to see the prices fall later and the operations become money losers....but in the long run, the oil shales, as well as the Canadian tar sands are a great asset.

[edit on 9/8/2005 by djohnsto77]

djohnston

in the long run, the oil shales, as well as the Canadian tar sands are a great asset.

Ahem.

I trust you are not claiming the Canadian tar sands as an American asset. ...?

Yeah burned bad......

I wonder if many even remember the $12 oil in the ealry 80's


Edit:

The Tar sands are a Canadian asset but the Minnesota National Guard could take it if needed. I mean all the US does is go to war for oil, at least that is what most in here think.....


:Joke: for my Canadian neighbors take it as such....

[edit on 8-9-2005 by edsinger]

By the way, here is the Rand Corporation press release on their own site. They are claiming this is for real.

Having never heard of Harold Doan, I decided to check it out. It appears legit - as least insofar as it is actually something that Rand Corp. is releasing.

Now, it should be interesting to see if any good comes of it, and what the enviornmental impacts are.

Personally, I still think we should spend the money on alternative power sources, rather than continuing to spend it on oil, which, sooner or later, WILL run out.

[edit on 8-9-2005 by obsidian468]

The ever improving lot of mankind is not over and if you go by resources, the resources will last longer than there will the humans as you know them today.


Yes fossil fuels we use today will be used up, but there are some technologies that will take their place that have very long lives.


Space based solar power could provide a hundred times the energy the world uses today.

Gas hydrates(methane ice) could provide the world with 30,000 years worth of hydrocarbons at current usage.

Hydrogen fusion would give us unlimited energy for ever.

A one mile wide asteroid would provide 2 yrs worth of iron , nickel, precious metals, and other resources. There are thousands of these.

If we can't build up we can build down in developed areas. I saw plans to build cities as deep as a mile underground. You could fit 100 million people in the space we now house 1 million.

The problem is not resources for future growth. It's concensus on direction and need. It's what your willing to pay to bring those resources online.


We will go to space for space-based solar(100X our current energy needs). We will use solar, nuclear(7,000 yrs worth of uranium) to make all the hydrogen we need. if nuclear fusion comes online our energy problems would be solved. There are (if you include Gas Hydrates) 30-40,000 yrs worth hydrocarbons and carbon asteroids would extend cheap hydrocarbons another 100,000 yrs. Metal asteroids(once cheap metal is used up here) could be brought into orbit processed in space and a wire run to Earth and then it's just a reel it in operation. Nuclear desalination plant could provide water. Underground cities could provide space for 100X the current population of Earth to live happy productive lives.

The only thing we have to fear is lack of imagination and leadership.

The info on these avenues to a more vibrant future are all over the web. There are cycles in energy, as one becomes too expensive others are brought online. We're not about to run out. Energy will just be a bigger part of the budget for awhile.


Space-based solar power was the main reason Pres. Bush is pushing for a new space initiative. It would make America a net hydrogen(energy) exporter. Were this to happen in the next 30 yrs the hydrocarbons in coal reserves in the U S would last 1000's of years(used for making things rather than burning) not 300 yrs.

This would take a continuous, consistent leadership on energy development.

There are some long term trends in the world and one is that in 100 yrs the people of india and china will be living at the same level as we do now. I don't know what level we will be at by then. We will probably have lives like the Jetsons. Eternal health, vacations on the Moon, etc.

The resources are there to mine and develop. Who will get there first?

The Europeans are about to invest $billions in fusion research.

U S is going back to the Moon to develop Solar potential.

A private company added up the worth of one 1 mile wide metal asteroid and came up w/ a $5 trillion figure if 50% of the material brought back were used for orbital solar satelites.

The Chinese want those same resources that is the reason behind their space program.

A little friendly competition?

Space-based solar power:

www.spacedaily.com...

www.spacedaily.com...

www.finetuning.com...


Gas Hydrates:

www.eia.doe.gov...

Nuclear desalination:

www.uic.com.au...

ITER fusion research:

www.iaea.org...


Deep underground cities:

www.wired.com...

Value of ateroids:

www.fortune.com...

"In particular, the asteroid Amun, a mountain of natural stainless steel mixed with precious metals, contains 30 times as much metal as humans have mined and processed throughout history, Lewis said. The smallest of dozens of known metallic asteroids, it would be worth at least an estimated $20 trillion based on current market prices. "

archives.cnn.com...

You have to look around. There is an element that would like to put the scare in people, but the real reason for the current crisis in energy is the enviromental laws in the US has made it impossible to build new transmission lines, nuclear power plants, oil refineries, etc and to upgrade these same facilities. They are pumping enough oil. We just can't process it fast enough.

When the hydrogen economy starts to kick-up you'll start to hear about plans for nuclear water-cracking plants to provide the hydrogen. They will build these in every city w/ good water resources.

www.eurekalert.org...








[edit on 9/8/2005 by bodebliss]

A space-based solar power system that would more than equal all the power output on Earth today would cost $1.5-2 trillion, but this would not just be a solution for the US it would make us the new energy shieks of Earth. We would be exporting energy to all in the form hydrogen as we have the water resources, also(fresh and solar driven desalination).

A recent discovery will make hydrogen storage safe and compact:

"Scientists at the Technical University of Denmark have invented a technology which may be an important step towards the hydrogen economy: a hydrogen tablet that effectively stores hydrogen in an inexpensive and safe material."

www.sciencedaily.com...