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.


Saudis to Quit the OIL business???

page: 1

log in


posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 01:00 PM
Khalid al-Falih, CEO of Saudi Aramco, Saudi Arabia's state-run giant: "Our goal is to reduce to the maximum extent possible the utilization [of oil]."

And it's not just talk.

Backing it up is a $130 BILLION investment from the Saudi royal family. A $130 BILLION earmark – more than Exxon's net income for the last three years combined – to make the switch to "NATURAL GAS" energy!

Do to cutting-edge technologies, we can now access mammoth deposits of natural gas that were unreachable only a decade ago in the UNITED STATES.

Dr. Kent Moors, Director of the Energy Policy Research Group at Duquesne University, puts it this way: "Welcome to North America: The new Saudi Arabia of energy."

Denise Bode, The President of of the American Clean Sky Foundation says,

"Frankly, no other energy source can do so much for America from fueling our vehicles to generating our electricity. The fact is America has substantial natural gas to fuel its future beyond this century and at a price that is likely to remain less than half the price of oil."

Below are a few of the companies investing in this trend!

Statoil (Norway's biggest energy firm): $250 million

Eni (Italy's major): $280 million

Total (France): $2.25 billion

British Petroleum: 2.85 billion

PetroChina: $3.2 billion

BG Group (Britain): $3.4 billion

Shell: $5.9 billion

Exxon: $40 billion

WOW this could change EVERYTHING!!! Who knew?

posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 01:06 PM
We will always have legitimate uses for oil but we are very wasteful right now. Tons gets burnt with high waste percentages.

Maybe we should all try to ween off oil?

We need to all consider getting out of the wasting oil business. And transition to a healthier system that maximizes resources rather than merely squanders them.
edit on 2-3-2011 by muzzleflash because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 01:13 PM
Finally a step in the right direction. But I can't help but to wonder what the catch is. Yes, we will need oil for plastics and lubricants, but natural gas is a good step towards weening the world off of oil. Hopefully there are no backroom politics going on here.

This thread needs more attention IMO. Will star and flag because I believe this "could" be a good thing.

posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 01:18 PM
I imagine it would be good for the economy, in the fact that we would all need new vehicles etc to run the natural gas. I would just hope we don't outsource the manufacturing to anywhere.....

posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 01:28 PM
Vegatable oils with nano improvements could be used instead of using crude oil.

posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 01:28 PM
This also has negative consequences as well. See the following link as this type of drilling for natural gas could cause other problems like earthquakes and pollution of the water in the areas of drilling.


posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 01:34 PM
Just another way to convince you to buy something that they want you to believe is LIMITED so that they can control and manipulate it.

It's just like oil... tell everyone it comes from fossils and we'll all think it's a limited resource that has to be spared, and therefore when there isn't "as much" as there was, it's time to increase the price.

Remember the BP oil spill? That spill was from drilling 5 miles down! We've NEVER found fossils that far down, but we expect there to be fossil fuel there? Please....

FACT: The oldest fossils on record are microscopic and that is from 3.5 billion years ago. These are NOT the fossils that make up fossil fuel, nor was there ever any point in existence where there were enough of these fossils to make up the amounts of fossil fuels found around the planet today.


FACT: Multi-cellular forms of life were not visible in the fossil record until 540 million years ago. These are also not what make up fossil fuels.


FACT: The DEEPEST a fossil has ever been found was 1.4 miles below the surface of the earth and from a period of around 195-210-million years ago.


If we were to JUST consider the facts, it would be impossible for the oil that was found by BP to be fossil fuel, and therefore, it throws that whole idea in the trash, where it belongs.

Abiotic oil is what is produced by the earth in natural cycles, and the oil companies know this. They also know that people are starting to figure out what I just described - that fossil fuels don't "fit" what has been explained to us compared to the things we've witnessed. When oil started leaking from 5 miles down, people started wondering how fossils could be that far down in the earth? That's when the cat was let out of the bag... the fossil record completely contradicts it.

Now they want to do the same thing with natural gas? When is it going to stop?

All so that a small group of people can stay in control and prevent the relinquishing of their power and wealth. Sickening and I hope people don't fall for yet another scam by TPTB.

edit on 2-3-2011 by SonOfTheLawOfOne because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 01:37 PM
Natural gas? It would have been nice if the link to stansberryresearch had something written, instead of a video presentation to sit through.

It isn't new, it's just natural gas. We've been heating our homes up here with natural gas for years now.

I watched (listened to) a bunch of that presentation, only to find out they're trying to get investors for something that they're trying to pass off as new.

I'm not sure about how new the method of hydraulic fracturing is, but it's not that new. Canada has been doing that for a while now. We don't even use water in our methods up here, we use some type of butane chemical mix to force out the gas, and then recover the butane chemical mix for other shale deposits.

Also, if the method isn't done properly, it pollutes (destroys) water sources and causes small earthquakes.

Ok, apparently there are different types of natural gas, there is both compressed and liquid. I don't know the details or how to describe the differences, but natural gas has been around for decades

Oil replaces coal as Canada's largest single source of energy; pipelines established to transport natural gas to Vancouver, Winnipeg, Toronto and Montreal.

The above excerpt is from the line that says 1950.
I can't find when they started doing the shale frakking up here, but I don't think it's that new. Maybe a decade or so.

It sounds like it's been around for a few years in the US also, but I think the frakking methods haven't been used as much as in Canada.
edit on 2-3-2011 by snowspirit because: added

posted on Mar, 2 2011 @ 02:32 PM
They will just drive up the price of the NAT GAS. Need to completely start over with GOV and then the resources to be worthwhile

new topics

top topics


log in