If one reads these two "Pipelineistan" pieces, it's obvious why Cheney...

[lindashaw]

doesn't want his energy meetings opened by the courts. It's a total disgrace and stinks to absolute heaven!


http://www.atimes.com/c-asia/DA25Ag01.html

http://www.atimes.com/c-asia/DA26Ag01.html

[JohnyCanuck]

1. Peak Oil

Re. the desire to controle Caspian Sea basin oil and gas, Petroleum geologist and retired oil industry executive Colin Campbell has been saying much the same thing as these Asia Time articles, except that he is also saying now that the oil reserves in that area have been overestimated. The 200 billion barrels quoted in the Asia Times article looks like it might have been a pipe dream (pun intended). However, it does help explain the use of the White House manufactured WMD crisis to immediately move into Iraq, especially if the peak oil theorists are correct in their prediction that the world will soon have reached a peak in oil production.

Once world oil production peaks, we'll find ourselves spending increasing amounts of money and energy to get decreasing amounts of oil (and no, it's not just a matter of switching to hydrogen). While alternatives will help ameliorate the effects, they will have a hard time replacing the concentrated and relatively cheap energy we get from burning oil.


FTW: Will Central Asian-Caspian pipelines have an impact on the crisis? How long will it take them to come on line?

Campbell: There was talk of the place holding over 200 Gb (I think emanating from the USGS ), but the results after 10 years of work have been disappointing. The West came in with high hopes. The Soviets found Tengiz onshore in 1979 with about 6 Gb of very deep, high sulfur oil in a reef. Chevron took over and is now producing it with difficulty. But offshore they found a huge prospect called Kashagan in a similar geological setting to Tengiz. If it had been full, it could have contained 200 Gb, but they have now drilled three deep wells at huge cost, finding that instead of being a single reservoir it, like Tengiz, is made up of reefs. Reserves are now quoted at between 9 Gb and 13 Gb. BP-Statoil has pulled out. Caspian production won't make any material difference to world supply. There is however a lot of gas in the vicinity.

To put it in perspective this would supply the world for a little over a year, but it is broadly the same as U.S. potential

It is quite possible that the Afghan war was about securing a strong point in this area. But interest in it has now dwindled along with Caspian prospects as the U.S. turns to Iraq, which does have some oil. It is curious that these two U.S. military exercises had different pretexts

A) Afghanistan was to find the supposed architect of Sept. 11 -- in which it failed; and

B) Iraq is about a sudden and unexplained fear that it might develop some objectionable weapons that might pose a threat to someone in the future. North Korea, which already has nuclear weapons and long range missiles -- and isn't exactly a friendly place -- is not deemed a threat. The cynic can be forgiven for thinking there is some other motive for these military moves: could it be oil?

www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/102302_campbell.html

Why Hydrogen is not the answer.
www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/081803_hydrogen_answers.html

For more articles on this topic go to:http://www.fromthewilderness.com/free/ww3/index.html#oil and click on the individual links. Some articles require a subscription, but most are free. See also www.postcarbon.org www.hubbertpeak.com

[Widgetsfriend]

2. Oil question.

Do we consume/burn all of the oil we drill?

[JohnyCanuck]

3. My understanding

For the most part, any oil that gets pumped out of the ground gets refined and the resulting products gasoline, diesel, lubricating oil etc. gets consumed. The US gov't maintains a strategic reserve of crude oil in salt caverns for use in crisis situations and/or when oil shipments to the US might be disrupted due to wars, natural disasters etc.

From time to time the US gov't adds to these reserves by buying crude oil and pumping it into the reserve storage facilities or it might release some crude from the reserves to the market if it feels conditions warrant. I am not sure what reserves other governments maintain. The US reserves are the ones you always read about in newspaper or magazine articles.

Here's an article I found discussing the US oil reserve and how it should be used in the runup to the Iraq invasion.

With war in Iraq increasingly likely, one question now looming is whether to use our strategic petroleum reserves to prevent a severe disruption in oil supplies or a sharp price hike. Venezuela stopped exporting 1.5 million barrels of oil a day to the United States last December due to a strike, and while production is recovering, output will not return to pre-strike levels without billions of Venezuelan government dollars.
But when gas prices at U.S. pumps rise 10 to 20 cents, it will not be Venezuela’s fault.

The fault lies with the Bush administration.
Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham has provided no guidelines on what constitutes a "severe disruption." And while the Strategic Petroleum Reserve is the most potent tool at President Bush’s disposal to prevent a price hike, he refuses to use it. The reserve is at its highest level ever, almost 600 million barrels, stored mostly in salt caverns in Louisiana — enough to replace all Venezuelan oil imports for just over a year. If President Bush cares about American consumers and our economy, he should release some of this oil to stabilize pump prices.

www.nyu.edu/globalbeat/syndicate/domjan031003.html

[Widgetsfriend]

4. Thanks.

I appreciate the information.