View Full Version : The Bakken Oil Formation
Sassy
05-01-2008, 06:15 PM
May 1st, 2008
The U.S. Geological Survey just published its official results of a groundbreaking study.
Its report confirmed a massive oil reserve in an area the locals have nicknamed the "Bakken," which stretches across North Dakota, Montana and southeastern Saskatchewan.The new USGS study estimates a whopping 3.65 billion barrels of oil in the Bakken... but here's what they didn't mention:
The reported 3.65 billion barrels of oil mean estimate is for 'undiscovered' oil only, and doesn't include known oil, such as reserves.
In fact, the study reports a 25-fold increase in the amount of oil that can be recovered... compared to the agency's estimate back in 1995.
Discovered over 50 years ago, the Bakken deposit--once impossible to extract--is now being hailed as the single largest oil find in US history.
That's because, today, thanks to breakthrough drilling techniques like horizontal drilling, the Bakken's oil shales can be extracted relatively cheaply.
When that happens, this light, sweet oil will cost Americans just $16 per barrel!
The next oil boom is already upon us.
And, considering that oil prices are likely to remain above $100 a barrel, the time for shock is over. Investors are now faced with an unprecedented opportunity to play the U.S. and Canada's new hottest oil stocks... several of which are poised to make 300% gains during 2008.
To get the full details on the Bakken and the leading stocks behind it--before the story goes mainstream--simply sign up for the free Energy and Capital e-Letter, a daily advisory on the fast-moving profits in the energy stock sector, written and edited by energy and natural resources investing experts Chris Nelder and Keith Kohl.
The Lone Bolt
05-01-2008, 06:29 PM
Link please?
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
05-01-2008, 06:32 PM
When that happens, this light, sweet oil will cost Americans just $16 per barrel!
ROFL!
Good one!
TheDave
05-01-2008, 06:35 PM
Link please?
http://www.usgs.gov/newsroom/article.asp?ID=1921 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eBGIQ7ZuuiU)
Sassy
05-01-2008, 06:38 PM
http://www.transworldnews.com/NewsStory.aspx?ID=42081
http://www.energyandcapital.com/articles/bakken-oil-trade/658
http://bakkenoil.com/?gclid=CJGN4tW6hpMCFQUpIgod9A65TA
Sassy
05-01-2008, 06:44 PM
http://minnesota.publicradio.org/display/web/2008/04/10/ndoil/
North Dakota oil finds a big one
by Dan Gunderson, Minnesota Public Radio
April 11, 2008
Listen to feature audio
The oil industry is booming in North Dakota, and a new study is likely to encourage even more development. The U.S. Geological Survey says North Dakota has the largest recoverable oil formation in the lower 48 states.
Moorhead, Minn. — There's been speculation for years about a western North Dakota formation known as the Bakken Shale.
The formation extends into Montana and Canada. Geologists have estimated the area holds hundreds of billions of barrels of oil. "This is the largest oil accumulation in the lower 48. It is also the largest continuous type of oil accumulation that we have ever assessed."
- Brenda Pierce, USGSThe problem has been how to get that oil out of the ground. It's not a pool you drill down to because this oil is in the rocks. But new technology makes it easier to collect that oil.
The USGS study says with todays technology, about 4 billion barrels of oil can be pumped from the Bakken formation.
In an interview provided by USGS, scientist Brenda Pierce put the North Dakota oil in context.
"Of the current USGS estimates, this is the largest oil accumulation in the lower 48," Pierce says. "It is also the largest continuous type of oil accumulation that we have ever assessed."
By comparison, the 4 billion barrels in North Dakota represent less than half the oil in the Arctic National Wildlife refuge which has an estimated 10 billion barrels of recoverable oil.
But Sen. Byron Dorgan (ND-D) says the 4 billion barrels in the Bakken Shale is only the beginning.
Oil Refinery"We know there's a lot more oil in the Bakken Shale, so does the USGS," Dorgan says. "Under todays technology that cannot be recovered. With tomorrows technology it likely could."
Dorgan says the release of the USGS study should encourage more investment in pipelines, or perhaps a refinery in the state.
"It makes some sense and would provide some comfort I think to those who would like to make longer term investments, especially in an oil refinery. I hope our state would be interested and the private sector would be interested so we could have a new refinery or a very significant expansion of the refinery that exists," Dorgan says.
Oil companies are already working to drill hundreds of new wells in North Dakota. If oil prices stay high, it's likely the boom in North Dakotas oil patch will continue.
sisterhellfyre
05-01-2008, 07:18 PM
May 1st, 2008
When that happens, this light, sweet oil will cost Americans just $16 per barrel!
And when pigs grow wings, we'll call them pigeons.
The crude price may come down some, maybe as far as $90 per barrel, but I think it's far more likely that the price will stay right where it is. This new oil will be shipped overseas to China and India. And the oil companies involved will just get even fatter and even richer.
There's too much money tied up in overseas operations and gargantuan tankers for the oil companies to just set them aside.
Regards,
m.
Spider
05-01-2008, 07:22 PM
And when pigs grow wings, we'll call them pigeons.
The crude price may come down some, maybe as far as $90 per barrel, but I think it's far more likely that the price will stay right where it is. This new oil will be shipped overseas to China and India. And the oil companies involved will just get even fatter and even richer.
There's too much money tied up in overseas operations and gargantuan tankers for the oil companies to just set them aside.
Regards,
m.
do you understand the amount of oil we are talking about here ?
In a perfect world , we would tell opec to **** off and die a slow miserable death , and off of just what is in N.Dakota alone , we could supply ourselfs for 20 years ...... Just off the N.Dakota part ......I could be wrong , but I think the one in Colorado is bigger yet
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
05-01-2008, 07:29 PM
And when pigs grow wings, we'll call them pigeons.
:giggle: :yep:
Yep.
I wasn't laughing because it couldn't happen.
I was laughing because the oil companies and their shareholders don't want it to happen.
That's why they hired Smirk & Dick.
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
05-01-2008, 07:38 PM
Why the government doesn't want America to supply its own energy needs:
The Energy Non-Crisis (http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=3340274697167011147&q=the+energy+n%20%20on+crisis&total=73&start=0&num=10&so=0&type=sea%20rch%20&plindex=1)
Meck77
05-01-2008, 07:50 PM
Good for the Dakotas. No offense to those that live there but I'd rather other states be trashed instead of Colorado. I'd rather pay $5.00 a gallon than see the "oil shale" areas of Colorado jacked up.
What I'd like to see is oil prices stay high enough to continue to piss off more Americans. Yeah it sounds like ass backwards thinking but the buzz up my way is "I'm getting rid of the SUV, I'm adding solar power, I'm looking at buying a motorcycle etc".
I hate seeing people having a hard time but people will not change unless forced to. Gas right now is high enough to where the economy can still hang on and people are changing. A sudden drop and we'll be right back where we were. There is simply no reason for people to drive diesel PU trucks 45 miles to work one way if all you are doing is getting from point A to B.
Rant over.
*edit* I tend to agree with you on that link also LA. In an ideal world we'd make a slow transition from foreign oil and keep our economy going but common sense and government don't go hand in hand. Democrats, Republicans, they are all a bunch of scumbags.
I have a comment on the American food crisis also. I call Bullshiat on that also. I was at the grocery store and loaded up on $100 worth of vegis, fruits, meat on sale, etc for $60.00 after discounts. Meanwhile you have people stacking up on frozen pizza and other BS and you end up with half the food.
A little bit of common sense and healthier shopping and you can actually get more food for less money.
TexanBob
05-01-2008, 08:03 PM
Don't be an envirobigot. Turn on the spigot.
Meck77
05-01-2008, 08:07 PM
Don't be an envirobigot. Turn on the spigot.
You know I've never been the tree hugging type. Always have loved nature and now that I'm living right in the middle of it out of the city I've taken a personal assessment to the amount of energy and waste I was producing. I'm actually saving more money now by being aware of it and changing some simple habits even though gas prices are going up.
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
05-01-2008, 08:24 PM
Don't be an envirobigot. Turn on the spigot.
That you believe it's the environmentalists who are stopping the government from "opening the spigot" just proves you have imbibed the right-wing Kool-Aid.
Our dependence on foreign oil is the only thing keeping the U.S. dollar afloat.
I don't get enough "investment" spam via e-mail; now I get this **** on the OM.
Spider
05-02-2008, 11:29 AM
You know I've never been the tree hugging type. Always have loved nature and now that I'm living right in the middle of it out of the city I've taken a personal assessment to the amount of energy and waste I was producing. I'm actually saving more money now by being aware of it and changing some simple habits even though gas prices are going up.
Colorado has to be drilled up ......... no other way around it .... I admit drilling rigs are nasty , dirty , wreck havoc on the environment ... but you do what you got to do
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
05-23-2008, 06:21 AM
<center> http://www.bartcop.com/ice-melting-oil.jpg
</center>
cutthemdown
05-23-2008, 01:39 PM
That you believe it's the environmentalists who are stopping the government from "opening the spigot" just proves you have imbibed the right-wing Kool-Aid.
Our dependence on foreign oil is the only thing keeping the U.S. dollar afloat.
the dollar is kept afloat because of faith Americans will keep working hard and the economy will survive.
Also China buys up dollars so they can keep the Yaun devalued in comparison to it. This also causes the dollar to stay strong.
cutthemdown
05-23-2008, 01:41 PM
That you believe it's the environmentalists who are stopping the government from "opening the spigot" just proves you have imbibed the right-wing Kool-Aid.
Our dependence on foreign oil is the only thing keeping the U.S. dollar afloat.
The why do environmentalist protest and thwart drilling everywhere or the building of new refineries?
BroncoBuff
05-23-2008, 02:40 PM
I saw that ... NORTH FREAKING DAKOTA!
I have some inside info on this, too (really). Marathon Oil is the corporation that spearheaded this discovery, and my uncle was chief geologist for Marathon until he retired a few years back (he was the first geologist into ANWaR in the 70s). He says the ND find is not nearly as big as ANWaR, but because it's so close to refineries and population centers that it has the potential to alter the global oil dynamic.
But he says the problem is big producers are reluctant to jump feet-first back into any domestic production because they've sunk mega-massive resources into foreign and middle-east production and transportation in the past 20 years ... super-tankers and the latest super-super-tankers constitute 10s of billions of dollars in investment, and those systems and processes are smoothly delivering mega-profits right now. Therefore, he says they'll be reluctant to shell out hardware and infrastructure monies on new sources, regardless where they are.
BroncoBuff
05-23-2008, 02:44 PM
Put simply, if you're already making $100k/year commuting 60 miles roundtrip daily ... why would you shell out money for training and equipment to take a $40k job, even if it's right down the street?
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
05-23-2008, 07:22 PM
the dollar is kept afloat because of faith Americans will keep working hard and the economy will survive.
Also China buys up dollars so they can keep the Yaun devalued in comparison to it. This also causes the dollar to stay strong.
:oyvey:
I know you're not really this naive and/or uninformed(?)
The only think keeping the dollar afloat is its status as petro currency.
That's why gas is at or near $4 a gallon - everytime you fill up, you are paying a tax at the pump on the debt and to keep the dollar from going under.
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
05-23-2008, 07:28 PM
The why do environmentalist protest and thwart drilling everywhere or the building of new refineries?
Group: Internal memos show oil companies limited refineries to drive up prices
The Foundation for Taxpayer and Consumer Rights (FTCR) today exposed internal oil company memos that show how the industry intentionally reduced domestic refining capacity to drive up profits, RAW STORY has learned.
The three internal memos from Mobil, Chevron and Texaco illustrate how the oil juggernauts reduced refining capacity and drove independent refiners out of business in an effort to increase prices. The highly confidential memos reveal a nationwide effort by American Petroleum Institute, the lobbying and research arm of the oil industry, to encourage major refiners to close their refineries in the mid-1990s.
Continues: http://rawstory.com/news/2005/Group_Internal_memos_show_oil_companies_limited_re fineries_to_drive_up__0907.html
Riiiiiiight - the environmentalists have had their way with Bush for the last seven years.
That's the reason for our current energy predicament.
And did I mention the oil revenues paid for Iraq's reconstruction and the people greeted us with flowers?
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
05-24-2008, 04:26 AM
<center> http://www.bartcop.com/hows-my-gouging.jpg
</center>
Group: Internal memos show oil companies limited refineries to drive up prices
In the mid-1990s. It's 2008 now.
Got anything more recent?
Got anything that doesn't implicate the Clinton administration in allowing these things to happen?
cutthemdown
05-24-2008, 01:52 PM
:oyvey:
I know you're not really this naive and/or uninformed(?)
The only think keeping the dollar afloat is its status as petro currency.
That's why gas is at or near $4 a gallon - everytime you fill up, you are paying a tax at the pump on the debt and to keep the dollar from going under.
wrong
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
05-24-2008, 07:16 PM
wrong
Wow - that was an incisive and well-thought-out rebuttal. Uhh
If you disagree with the statement, then maybe you can explain to us what the dollar is backed by.
In any event, are you really so naive as to claim that the dollar wouldn't crash if oil sales were not denominated in US dollars?
Spider
05-24-2008, 08:08 PM
In the mid-1990s. It's 2008 now.
Got anything more recent?
Got anything that doesn't implicate the Clinton administration in allowing these things to happen?
I dont know how I missed this post , but google enron loophole .......Read it and weep son
Enron didn't run refineries; it was an energy trader that took advantage of perverse government regulation.
Spider
05-24-2008, 10:15 PM
Enron didn't run refineries; it was an energy trader that took advantage of perverse government regulation.
well that proves it didnt happen under Clinton , Clinton didnt create the situation it could have happened in ...... And Bush made that perverse regulation ....you asked for anything that didnt implicate the Clintons ....... well you got your proof
well that proves it didnt happen under Clinton , Clinton didnt create the situation it could have happened in ...... And Bush made that perverse regulation ....you asked for anything that didnt implicate the Clintons ....... well you got your proof
You're wandering off tangent again...
The damning memos LABF pulls out from time to time are about refining capacity in the mid-1990s (under Clinton); the regulations under which Enron gamed California energy markets were at roughly the same time, and they were written and signed into law by Californian Democrats in their legislature and Gray Davis, the governor at the time. Bush had nothing to do with those regulations.
Next time, I recommend you do a little reading before you write, Spider.
Spider
05-24-2008, 10:27 PM
You're wandering off tangent again...
The damning memos LABF pulls out from time to time are about refining capacity in the mid-1990s (under Clinton); the regulations under which Enron gamed California energy markets were at roughly the same time, and they were written and signed into law by Californian Democrats in their legislature and Gray Davis, the governor at the time. Bush had nothing to do with those regulations.
Next time, I recommend you do a little reading before you write, Spider.
It is you who should do some reading ...LABF clearly stated that was the cause of todays energy predicament. you both are wrong .......Oil and Gas manipulation didnt get bad until 2000
Considering that almost all the oil on the planet is owned and controlled by governments, your argument is rather silly, Spider.
Spider
05-24-2008, 11:07 PM
Considering that almost all the oil on the planet is owned and controlled by governments, your argument is rather silly, Spider.
How so ? are you telling me oil isnt traded on the markets ? did you even read the Enron loopole ?
Arkie
05-25-2008, 12:31 AM
When that happens, this light, sweet oil will cost Americans just $16 per barrel!
This would never happen because of the global profits.
Arkie
05-25-2008, 01:00 AM
Clinton and Bush are the same monster...
http://www.prisonplanet.com/Pictures/Sept05/220905clinton_bush.jpg
http://blogs.chron.com/whitehouse/archives/Bush%20Clinton%20reuters.jpg
http://www.oilempire.us/graphics/clinton_bush_june28-2005.jpg
http://www.badeagle.com/journal/archives/ClintonBush.jpg
http://static.howstuffworks.com/gif/clinton-library.jpg
http://pub.tv2.no/multimedia/na/archive/00196/clinton-og-bush-sto_196968c.jpg
http://timesonline.typepad.com/photos/uncategorized/2007/06/13/bush_and_clinton.jpg
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/ca/Bill_Clinton%2C_George_H._W._Bush%2C_George_W._Bus h_and_Silvio_Berlusconi.jpg
http://www.theage.com.au/ffximage/2006/01/30/svEXPRES_wideweb__470x354,0.jpg
http://priceoffreedom.files.wordpress.com/2008/01/bushclinton.jpg
Arkie
05-25-2008, 01:03 AM
If Hillary has 8 years,
Woooooooo Pig Soooooooooooieeeeeeeeee, the South will rise again....
28 years of Bushes and Clintons.
http://oinkville.tripod.com/billhog.jpg
That's more than a 1/4 century
1988-2016
orinjkrush
05-25-2008, 04:37 AM
it is an unbelievable travesty that our nation has not embarked on an energy "Manhattan project" the last 40 years given our reliance on hostile, foreign suppliers.
it shows how both the left and the right are "owned" and not very patriotic to boot.
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
05-25-2008, 04:38 AM
It is you who should do some reading ...LABF clearly stated that was the cause of todays energy predicament. you both are wrong .......Oil and Gas manipulation didnt get bad until 2000
Well, at least W*GS is now willing to admit that Enron did, in fact, game the CA energy markets.
That's progress, I guess. ;D
How so ? are you telling me oil isnt traded on the markets ? did you even read the Enron loopole ?
Enron traded energy, not oil.
Well, at least W*GS is now willing to admit that Enron did, in fact, game the CA energy markets.
When will you admit that Enron was able to play its games because the Democrat-passed CA legislation was asinine?
Spider
05-25-2008, 10:08 AM
Enron traded energy, not oil.
Knock it the **** off stupid ....... Oil is ENERGY you dumb bastard ......Just like natural gas
Spider
05-25-2008, 10:11 AM
Well, at least W*GS is now willing to admit that Enron did, in fact, game the CA energy markets.
That's progress, I guess. ;D
;D....... I gave up on progress and W*GS
Knock it the **** off stupid ....... Oil is ENERGY you dumb bastard ......Just like natural gas
Read up on Enron. Please.
Spider
05-25-2008, 10:57 AM
Read up on Enron. Please.
Been there done that ....... You need to look up what falls under the umbrella of Energy ...... Enron traded Oil , Nat Gas , propane , electricity etc with very few hard assets ...... What Bush went and did was ease regulations and wiped out any over site energy trades had to deal with .......energy is more then just batteries and electricity W*GS ....
Enron did the bulk of its trading in energy, not oil, despite your attempts to confuse the issue.
Still doesn't have a lot to do with the fact that almost all oil is owned and controlled by governments, Spider.
Kinda puts your "the government will save us from greedy oil companies" idea into the ****ter.
Spider
05-25-2008, 11:07 AM
Enron did the bulk of its trading in energy, not oil, despite your attempts to confuse the issue.
Still doesn't have a lot to do with the fact that almost all oil is owned and controlled by governments, Spider.
Kinda puts your "the government will save us from greedy oil companies" idea into the ****ter.
Oh bull**** ..... you are just spinning now ..... with this stupid ass post do you somehow think you are saving face ? Lets see we went from Enron didnt trade oil to Enron did the bulk of its trading in Energy ( admitting they traded oil ) ...... ROFL ... your own spinning is catching up to you
Spider
05-25-2008, 11:09 AM
W*GS ask yourself this ****ing question and try not to bull**** yourself answering it ....... why have the Enron loophole ? why change the way Energy Including heating oil , propane , Nat Gas , coal , Oil , refined Gas ... was Traded ? If the Enron Loophole didnt have an effect , then why change the rule energy is traded under ?
Tell me what the "Enron loophole" is, and why it's bad.
I don't accept anything you say as true because you have a long and known history of bull****ting because you're too ****ing stupid to know the facts.
Spider
05-25-2008, 11:28 AM
Tell me what the "Enron loophole" is, and why it's bad.
I don't accept anything you say as true because you have a long and known history of bull****ting because you're too ****ing stupid to know the facts.This coming from a turd that didnt know Oil was considered energy ......
Again .......... W*GS ask yourself this ****ing question and try not to bull**** yourself answering it ....... why have the Enron loophole ? why change the way Energy Including heating oil , propane , Nat Gas , coal , Oil , refined Gas ... was traded ? If the Enron Loophole didnt have an effect , then why change the rule energy is traded under ?
Spider
05-25-2008, 11:29 AM
you answer that question W*GS ..
Spider
05-25-2008, 11:34 AM
Pretty strait froward question W*GS .... An educated man like yourself , should be able to tell me , Why change the way Energy commodities are traded , if the enron loophole has no effect ? Then why do it ?
http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showpost.php?p=1967945&postcount=49
Do you know enough to discuss it? Apparently not.
Spider
05-25-2008, 12:00 PM
http://www.orangemane.com/BB/showpost.php?p=1967945&postcount=49
Do you know enough to discuss it? Apparently not.
look me up when you can answer that question instead of dodging W*GS .....
Spider
05-25-2008, 12:01 PM
:rofl: same ole W*GS , spinning , Dodging , not answering questions that pin him down , yet he thinks he brings something to the conversation
Spider thinks this "Enron loophole" explains everything.
Yet he's unable to provide an explanation.
In short, he's a ****ing pussy.
Spider
05-25-2008, 12:07 PM
answer the question W*GS , dont make this about me son ..... everyone already Knows i am great .......
Great at being an asshole...
Spider
05-25-2008, 12:33 PM
Great at being an a-hole...
Still great
BroncoBuff
05-25-2008, 01:09 PM
Try to look at this situation from the perspective of the oil giants: None of the corporations with the resources to tap Bakken show any desire to do so, and the reason is simple: their infrasctructure and systems in place now for the delivery of oil to US consumers is resulting in the highest profits in the history of the world. Why mess with that?
They could find oil even closer to population centers than ND ... a similar field in eastern freaking Pennsylvania would lay untapped because none of the multi-nationals that CAN tap such a resource WILL tap it. None have the slightest interest in expending any monies toward domestic fields when the resulting supply might depress their profits. Duh.
The only way to make this happen is a broad tak break for domestic exploration and production. And right now any tax breaks for oil companies would go over like a political lead zeppelin.
L.A. BRONCOS FAN
05-25-2008, 10:31 PM
Try to look at this situation from the perspective of the oil giants: None of the corporations with the resources to tap Bakken show any desire to do so, and the reason is simple: their infrasctructure and systems in place now for the delivery of oil to US consumers is resulting in the highest profits in the history of the world. Why mess with that?
Ding ding ding! :thumbsup:
Thank you!
Anything the oil companies (and their proxy in the WH) can do to limit production and keep supplies tight is money in the bank for them and their shareholders.
Their bottom line and their shareholder profits are all they care about.
Screw the American economy.