Originally posted by dbates
We should note that there's a $15.00 monthly fee for having a water meter in this example, but I think you get the point. Do you still think this is
a fair comparison?
Imo It is a more that fair comparison as lay people's comparisons go...
The argument that capital expenditures would be a constraint was countered by noting that costs are, by the most liberal estimate, under two
dollars a barrel and more accurately about $.50 a barrel. The Saudi’s admitted to the use of water flooding in their fields but pointed out that the
water cut after four decades at Ghawar was below 40%, had been stable for five years, and was far below what Western companies often produce in their
fields. The New York Times Article The article in February 24 New York Times is a fascinating and sweeping review of water are referred to as the
tired Saudi oil fields.
www.aramcoexpats.com...
Now considering that that is 44 gallons of usable material and around 19 gallons of gas it works out to 10 US cents per gallon of gas.
These are some of the links i found tonight ( less than a hour of reading and searching ) during my frequent expeditions to see what's happening in
this 'field'.
www.mises.org...
news.scotsman.com...
www.aramcoexpats.com...
calsun.canoe.ca...
All i can ask is that no one buy into Peak oil and that they keep asking questions till they are ready to continue demanding ever higher and efficient
standards of living. Don't compromise you rights due unfounded fears!
Stellar
