It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Two Hundred Billion Barrels of Oil in North Dakota

page: 3
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in


posted on Feb, 21 2008 @ 04:21 AM
The planning committee is suppose to have a decision soon. They say they want it done in thirteen months after Hoeven signs it.

posted on Feb, 21 2008 @ 04:24 AM
Yea its gotten a lot cheaper to do it. The last one was built in the 70's. The technology has gotten better apparently. I don't know all that much about it as far as economy of it. But it must be worth the money otherwise I don't think they would be building this thing. It suppose to be massive.

posted on Feb, 21 2008 @ 04:36 AM
Isn't stanly spelt stanely?

posted on Feb, 21 2008 @ 04:43 AM
Yeah its spelled Stanley.

posted on Feb, 21 2008 @ 04:44 AM

Originally posted by kingkn8
The technology has gotten better apparently. I don't know all that much about it as far as economy of it. But it must be worth the money otherwise I don't think they would be building this thing.

Ahh ok so its being built, ok thanks!
Thanks a bunch for all the information you have posted on this thread

It has all been good to read.
I hope the coal gas plant will prove fruitful.

posted on Feb, 21 2008 @ 04:52 AM
So are these forums always this fun?

posted on Feb, 21 2008 @ 04:54 AM
reply to post by RedGolem

It was action taken to prevent a gas shortage like we had during harvest this year.

posted on Feb, 21 2008 @ 05:03 AM
Interesting thread guys

It makes me wonder with all the oil that is 'supposedly' available on American soil, do you think the big guys have just been waiting until oil prices have peaked out?

More money to make on $100 a barrel than $ 35.

A side note to King,

Its nice to see a new member bringing so much insight to the table, good contribution and a STAR for your efforts

posted on Feb, 21 2008 @ 06:30 AM
Here is some more coal gas info in reference to a question I asked king about it.

High prices of oil and natural gas are leading to increased interest in "BTU Conversion" technologies such as gasification, methanation and liquefaction.

Coal gasification breaks down the coal into its components, usually by subjecting it to high temperature and pressure, using steam and measured amounts of oxygen. This leads to the production of syngas, a mixture mainly consisting of carbon monoxide (CO) and hydrogen (H2).

In the past, coal was converted to make coal gas, which was piped to customers to burn for illumination, heating, and cooking. At present, the safer natural gas is used instead. South Africa still uses gasification of coal for much of its petrochemical needs.

Coals can also be converted into liquid fuels like gasoline or diesel by several different processes. The Fischer-Tropsch process of indirect synthesis of liquid hydrocarbons was used in Nazi Germany for many years and is today used by Sasol in South Africa. Coal would be gasified to make syngas (a balanced purified mixture of CO and H2 gas) and the syngas condensed using Fischer-Tropsch catalysts to make light hydrocarbons which are further processed into gasoline and diesel. Syngas can also be converted to methanol, which can be used as a fuel, fuel additive, or further processed into gasoline via the Mobil M-gas process.

A direct liquefaction process Bergius process (liquefaction by hydrogenation) is also available but has not been used outside Germany, where such processes were operated both during World War I and World War II. SASOL in South Africa has experimented with direct hydrogenation. Several other direct liquefaction processes have been developed, among these being the SRC-I and SRC-II (Solvent Refined Coal) processes developed by Gulf Oil and implemented as pilot plants in the United States in the 1960s and 1970s.[9]

Another direct hydrogenation process was explored by the NUS Corporation in 1976 and patented by Wilburn C. Schroeder. The process involved dried, pulverized coal mixed with roughly 1wt% molybdenum catalysts. Hydrogenation occurred by use of high temperature and pressure synthesis gas produced in a separate gasifier. The process ultimately yielded a synthetic crude product, Naphtha, a limited amount of C3/C4 gas, light-medium weight liquids (C5-C10) suitable for use as fuels, small amounts of NH3 and significant amounts of CO2.[10]


posted on Feb, 21 2008 @ 08:05 AM
reply to post by RedGolem
See told I didn't know much about it lol. I know we sent a bunch of people from our experimental plants to South Africa. Then the South Africans came to see ours. I guess it was a show and tell. This was many years ago tho.

posted on May, 12 2008 @ 08:09 AM
BUSH should do somingthing about the oil but why would he he wants to bring america to its knees.America could turn into a third world county.

posted on Jun, 16 2008 @ 03:06 AM
reply to post by cyberchase

This is not Bush's call. This is the over zealous enviornmentalist fault. Good intentioned as they maybe they will run this country into a 1990's Russia or worse.

posted on Jun, 22 2008 @ 01:08 AM

posted on Jul, 16 2008 @ 07:13 PM

posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 12:57 AM
I heard on Foxnews that we have 3 times the amount of oil that Saudi Arabia has, just in the Rockies.

Then in alaska, we have the same amount that Saudi Arabia has just in the northern slope.

Then we have it all over our coasts, north east, and the south.

So, why are we not self-sufficient? I know there are environmentalists that do not want drilling, but is that all that is stopping us? Or is there more to the story?

posted on Jul, 18 2008 @ 01:04 AM

Originally posted by biggie smalls
reply to post by RedGolem

Why do we need oil?

I'm sorry, but I'm confused.

Technologies exist now on the cheap for everyone to be using clean cheap energy without the environmental cost of destroying the planet.

In case you are uneducated about what I'm talking about, I'd suggest you do your own homework and look up: Solar, wind, geothermal, biodiesel, and other fuel sources.

We do NOT need to keep drilling.

You don't have to be an environmentalists to realize this is a bad idea.

The oil and coal is going to run out sooner rather than later.

Why are we relying on a nonrenewable energy source?

If you really care about reducing/cutting our dependency on foreign oil, invest your time and energy (and money) into renewable resources.

You will do your children and their children and their children a great favor in case we actually need coal, oil, and natural gas for some odd reason.

How are poor people going to get these cars? If they can barely buy the gasoline to put into their cars, don't you think a brand new car is out of reach? With the housing market situation, there are tons of people that cannot take out a loan against their house and banks are not wanting to give out loans.

But if you have around 30k lying around then I guess you are alright. Or if you are a congressman, I guess you will be fine too. I guess the rich can take advantage of your fancy environment-friendly fuels. The rest of us need oil still, at least until we get out of debt.

[edit on 18-7-2008 by SFXBrandon]

posted on Nov, 9 2008 @ 03:07 AM
reply to post by ColdWater

Your math is WAY the frick off. 200,000,000,000 divided by 20,000,000 is 10,000. That's more than 27 years of oil.

posted on Nov, 26 2008 @ 09:56 AM
reply to post by biggie smalls

You have no idea what you are talking about. If it was so cheap and easy there would be 50 companies or people trying to do it right now.

It won't work for 10 to 20 years. what do you do in the mean time.????
Pay $10.00 a gallon .

Wake up Drill now or learn to speak Chinesse.

posted on Nov, 26 2008 @ 10:00 AM
And they say that drug addiction is a problem.

I differ with that opinion....OIL is more addictive than drugs and is FAR more of a problem than any drug in exsistance.

Isnt it time to power the world with something more moden and with the times????




Mod Edit: Advertising removed. Please see Terms and Conditions of Use section 4) Advertising. Thank you - Jak

[edit on 26/11/08 by JAK]

posted on Nov, 26 2008 @ 10:01 AM

Originally posted by RedGolem
But they allow China steal our oil as it drills off the coast of Cuba.

Not only there my friend, I live in Colorado and they gave the Chinese the western slopes of shale oil reserves. And they are using Chinese to do the drilling and everything, so it didn't even create any jobs for Coloradans. I think it is abhorrent to our system to give our wealth to those from another nation without so much as a by your leave to the People that own the resources of their State. I hope N. Dakota does own that oil and I hope it's on ndian Reservation land so at least some Americans will get the proceeds from the oil and not Exxon Mobile or the Chinese...

new topics

top topics

<< 1  2    4 >>

log in