God I Hope So

2008-04-11 18:55:42

#26

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6837|'Murka

Masques wrote:
The current US oil consumption is at around 20.7 million bbl/day (http://www.eia.doe.gov/neic/quickfacts/quickoil.html). At that rate we'd burn through that field (assuming total efficiency in extraction) in about 200 days.

It would be interesting to see how OPEC would react to 7 months of no income from the US...

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2008-04-11 19:44:49

#27

Masques: Black Panzer Party; +184|7148|Eastern PA

FEOS wrote:
Masques wrote:
The current US oil consumption is at around 20.7 million bbl/day (http://www.eia.doe.gov/neic/quickfacts/quickoil.html). At that rate we'd burn through that field (assuming total efficiency in extraction) in about 200 days.
It would be interesting to see how OPEC would react to 7 months of no income from the US...

Given that we get most of our oil from Canada and South America I don't think it'd have much of an effect. I suspect that they would be able to weather 200 days without US capital infusion.

Besides, at present, OPEC has little ability to control oil prices due to its lack of excess refining capacity. They can't really do much without affecting their bottom line.

2008-04-11 20:37:50

#28

Turquoise: O Canada; +1,596|6831|North Carolina

FEOS wrote:
Masques wrote:
The current US oil consumption is at around 20.7 million bbl/day (http://www.eia.doe.gov/neic/quickfacts/quickoil.html). At that rate we'd burn through that field (assuming total efficiency in extraction) in about 200 days.
It would be interesting to see how OPEC would react to 7 months of no income from the US...

They'd just shift more trade to China and India. World demand for oil is growing rapidly enough that OPEC could presumably get along just fine with or without our consumption.

2008-04-11 20:39:01

#29

FEOS: Bellicose Yankee Air Pirate; +1,182|6837|'Murka

Dammit! I was hoping we could stick it to the man...in robes and a kaffeyah.

“Everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”
― Albert Einstein
Doing the popular thing is not always right. Doing the right thing is not always popular

2008-04-11 20:45:56

#30

Spark: liquid fluoride thorium reactor; +874|7101|Canberra, AUS

I reckon that LPG will the be the 'fuel of the future'. People go on about hydrogen, but until we turn our powergrid almost totally towards to fuels that are far more efficient, far less damaging, hydrogen is as environmentally damaging as petrol.

Plus LPG is cheap ATM.

The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
^{~ Richard Feynman}

2008-04-11 21:56:57

#31

The#1Spot: Member; +105|6966|byah

usmarine wrote:
PuckMercury wrote:
this is not a solution, this is a bandage at best. Oil is finite no matter how much more we're able to find. This is to say nothing of the cost of the new technology which will obviously impact the final price regardless of OPEC bs.

Hydrogen man ... hydrogen.
I know that. But it IS a solution until we get something better.

Hydrogen powered cars are in the final stages before being a production vehicle. The US wont see one for probable 10-15 years after Asia and Europe have their cars in production within 5 years.

2008-04-11 21:57:59

#32

usmarine: Banned; +2,785|7188

The#1Spot wrote:
Hydrogen powered cars are in the final stages before being a production vehicle. The US wont see one for probable 10-15 years after Asia and Europe have their cars in production within 5 years.

I can't wait.

BF2S Forums God I Hope So

Masques wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Masques wrote:

FEOS wrote:

Masques wrote:

usmarine wrote:

PuckMercury wrote:

The#1Spot wrote:

Board footer