BF2S Forums Operation Drill Bit

+1 This is doable.  Im In. Only thing I have been doing is buying from NON- OPEC distributors (gas stations).



We have enough Hydrocarbons in so many different raw forms ti power the US ALONE for the next 200+ years!

Reciprocity wrote:

anwr


lulz

"ANWR, the Gulf of Mexico and other domestic resources."
The idea is researching a combination of resources. Anwar, the Gulf, Shale, algae (that's right)... not to mention we sit on the worlds largest coal reserve.

GorillaKing798 wrote:

What do we deem drill able?

Also what is our estimate of total resources withing the US currently?

Wood, plaster or drywall. With a high speed rotary hammer you can drill into concrete!
I estimate there are at least 25 gallons of oil we will get with our drill bits.

GorillaKing798 wrote:

ATG wrote:

GorillaKing798 wrote:

What do we deem drill able?

Also what is our estimate of total resources withing the US currently?

Wood, plaster or drywall. With a high speed rotary hammer you can drill into concrete!
I estimate there are at least 25 gallons of oil we will get with our drill bits.

Then let's get started with corrupt government officials homes!

In all seriousness, anyone have any info on this?

http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/fs-0028-01/fs-0028-01.htm That's anwr. The gulf is even more promising.  One of the problems we face is that the oil companies are reluctant to research certain locations. Research requires a large investment. It does not make sense for them to look in places where they know they can not drill.

Reciprocity wrote:

I dont mind using what we've got, as long as its worth while for more than a few executives and speculators.  Anwr is a waste of time.  The gulf coast may or may not be a waste of time.  coal and shale?  Filthy but useable.  Algae sounds great.

Anwr is still largely unexplored. I'd like to know the real possibilities before drawing conclusions about effort.

Kmarion wrote:

Reciprocity wrote:

I dont mind using what we've got, as long as its worth while for more than a few executives and speculators.  Anwr is a waste of time.  The gulf coast may or may not be a waste of time.  coal and shale?  Filthy but useable.  Algae sounds great.

Anwr is still largely unexplored. I'd like to know the real possibilities before drawing conclusions about effort.

With all the environmentalists surrounding it I don't believe there is even a remote chance of drilling occurring until you can show these people that drilling will not harm the environment or the habitats there, I don't think that is a feasible solution as of now.

The Gulf is also going to be heavily protected by environmentalists and you can bet Florida government will be fighting tooth and nail against it claiming the tourist industry will suffer.

The solutions are there, but they are heavily guarded and I almost think the money spent trying to lobby these people into submission would be better spent researching alternative fuels or making our current process more efficient. It will take much higher prices before these people give up the gusto.

GorillaKing798 wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Reciprocity wrote:

I dont mind using what we've got, as long as its worth while for more than a few executives and speculators.  Anwr is a waste of time.  The gulf coast may or may not be a waste of time.  coal and shale?  Filthy but useable.  Algae sounds great.

Anwr is still largely unexplored. I'd like to know the real possibilities before drawing conclusions about effort.

With all the environmentalists surrounding it I don't believe there is even a remote chance of drilling occurring until you can show these people that drilling will not harm the environment or the habitats there, I don't think that is a feasible solution as of now.

The Gulf is also going to be heavily protected by environmentalists and you can bet Florida government will be fighting tooth and nail against it claiming the tourist industry will suffer.

The solutions are there, but they are heavily guarded and I almost think the money spent trying to lobby these people into submission would be better spent researching alternative fuels or making our current process more efficient. It will take much higher prices before these people give up the gusto.

Do you know China is digging closer to the Florida coast than we are? (Between the keys and Cuba) Nice huh.. They also lag significantly in the areas of cleanup and enviromental disaster response.

Kmarion wrote:

GorillaKing798 wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Anwr is still largely unexplored. I'd like to know the real possibilities before drawing conclusions about effort.

With all the environmentalists surrounding it I don't believe there is even a remote chance of drilling occurring until you can show these people that drilling will not harm the environment or the habitats there, I don't think that is a feasible solution as of now.

The Gulf is also going to be heavily protected by environmentalists and you can bet Florida government will be fighting tooth and nail against it claiming the tourist industry will suffer.

The solutions are there, but they are heavily guarded and I almost think the money spent trying to lobby these people into submission would be better spent researching alternative fuels or making our current process more efficient. It will take much higher prices before these people give up the gusto.

Do you know China is digging closer to the Florida coast than we are? (Between the keys and Cuba) Nice huh.. They also lag significantly in the areas of cleanup and enviromental disaster response.

Yes, that's what I was thinking is some of the irony in this, funny you don't hear much uproar from the environmentalists about it.

Certainly an interesting idea. I have a feeling that you'll get told to go fuck yourself by the environmental groups though, whom presumably donate a lot of money to politicians.

What is our current tax on gasoline?

I'm for tax breaks if they can meet certain expectations where they and the consumer would benefit from. For example; building new refineries that would result in lower fuel cost, creating low impact drills, discovering more practical long term solutions, all to certain standards that should be regulated by an unbiased source (fat chance).

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

The main logical flaw with this idea is that most oil companies here haven't fully explored the lands they already have access to.  When they actually do that, then we should consider ANWR.

Also, no matter what we choose to do, ALL tax breaks for oil companies should be eliminated.  I'm against windfall profits taxes, but I'm also against subsidizing an industry that obviously doesn't need the money.

What land are you talking about?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5111184/

"An Associated Press computer analysis of Bureau of Land Management records found that 80 percent of federal lands leased for oil and gas production in Wyoming are producing no oil or gas. Neither are 83 percent of the leased acres in Montana, 77 percent in Utah, 71 percent in Colorado, 36 percent in New Mexico and 99 percent in Nevada.

"with so much public land already available for exploration, environmental groups and local landowners are questioning why the Bush administration is pushing to lease still more federal land to the oil and gas industry, particularly in areas that the groups and some lawmakers want protected as federal wilderness areas."

Turquoise wrote:

Kmarion wrote:

Turquoise wrote:

The main logical flaw with this idea is that most oil companies here haven't fully explored the lands they already have access to.  When they actually do that, then we should consider ANWR.

Also, no matter what we choose to do, ALL tax breaks for oil companies should be eliminated.  I'm against windfall profits taxes, but I'm also against subsidizing an industry that obviously doesn't need the money.

What land are you talking about?

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5111184/

"An Associated Press computer analysis of Bureau of Land Management records found that 80 percent of federal lands leased for oil and gas production in Wyoming are producing no oil or gas. Neither are 83 percent of the leased acres in Montana, 77 percent in Utah, 71 percent in Colorado, 36 percent in New Mexico and 99 percent in Nevada.

"with so much public land already available for exploration, environmental groups and local landowners are questioning why the Bush administration is pushing to lease still more federal land to the oil and gas industry, particularly in areas that the groups and some lawmakers want protected as federal wilderness areas."

Reading that article it looks like they have explored it and haven't found crap worth using.

“A lot of these areas where existing leases are being held onto may have low potential for production, based on industry analysis now,” he said. “The industry is out there drilling the wells and doing the exploration, not us.”

It appears that article was implying that although there was low potential for fuel production it didn't stop the "land grab". A separate but disturbing point none-the-less.