Canada day greetings

He's not in the US, twitface. So I doubt he'd give a flying fart about the
Merkadians.

Ali

 

No, as time goes on and they have to extract the more difficult to get
at stuff, you will see the costs of doing so rise dramatically.
For now, they're just nibbling at the good stuff.

20%? The oil shocks of the 70s were caused by a shortfall of a mere 5%.
20% will cause economic collapse, unless we all learn how to live
without an ocean of cheap oil to blow up the chimney.

Of course not; the upward price spiral is here to stay now and there's
no going back. Previous shortages were man-made - now it's nature itself
that's running out. Do you have any idea just how much energy it takes
to extract a barrel of oil from sand/shale? It's pretty tight in profit
terms and that's before inefficiencies, wastage and cleanup cost is
taken into account. The only reason the shale reserves are being touched
at all is out of desperation. Personally, I thought they would remain
untouched for several decades yet - even I am surprised at the rise in
the rate of consumption worldwide.

 

Ah, but I do. Every thing the profligate do has some effect on me. Once
again, it's the greedy bastards who **** it up for everybody else.

 

"Nibbling at the good stuff". <snort> You oughta heed us Albertans
on this one, Grimly.

 

I hope I'm wrong about this - it would be utterly great to have a
fantastic new reservoir of easily got-at oil - but all the figures I've
seen so far about shale oil extraction don't augur well.

Then there's the environmentalists - we can't shoot all of them.

 

Bullshit! The good stuff is old oil that can be extracted and sold for
under twenty bucks a barrel.

Once again Bullshit! Today, right now, right here in Alberta, oil is
being mined from the tar sands, not just economically but with a very
tidy profit, after all expenses, including clean up and
rehabilitation.

More to the point billions are being invested to continue extracting
this oil for generations to come. They are not "nibbling"

You have your head stuck up your ass spouting the decades oil party
line it can't be done economically. Not only can it be done, it is
being done. Just because you can't accept it doesn't change the fact
it's true.

--


Don
RCOS# 7
Riding Again!

2000 - Yamaha Venture Millenium Edition

 

Might be what your thinking of, 'shale oil' is not the same thing.
Our source is basically oil-soaked sand. Not all that hard to
extract, once you have the right equipment and processes. Plus the
land is reclaimed and reforested after each site is worked.

The reserves are roughly equal to what resides in Saudi Arabia.

If an oil pinch kicks in hard, I don't think we really have to worry
who will win the argument.

 

Oh, just **** off, you tiresome ****.

 

And when faced with a sound logical point you can't refute, resort to
mindless name calling.

At least you spelled it correctly.


--


Don
RCOS# 7
Riding Again!

2000 - Yamaha Venture Millenium Edition

 

That's part of what I was getting at. The actual digging out is
relatively easy, if involving gigantic machines; the oil in the
shale/sand has to be extracted from it [1] and the spoil dumped until it
can all be heaved back into the empty worked-out hole. This adds
massively to the cost of production.

I'd heard a variety of figures ranging from 1:1 to 1:3, which is a huge
difference to the 'normal' ratio of deep well extraction of approx 1:30.
Such a close ratio doesn't leave much room for wastage and profit.

To supply who, though? Is that world demand or simply the N.American
continent?

[1] Near where I was brought up there were shale oil spoil tips left
over from late 19th C. lamp oil extraction. It was worthwhile then when
the price of oil was relatively high and before cheap drilled oil took
over the market. Afaik, the extraction process was simply heating the
shale in large containers and letting the oil run out the bottom. I
suspect if the cost of extraction included refilling the holes, there
might not have been much of an industry then. The lamp shale-oil
industry sprung up to supply cheaper lamp oil than the then favourite,
whale oil, which was quite expensive at the time.

 

You don't like my responses, then maybe you should reconsider posting your
drivel in public for all to see.

A spell checker might be a good thing to consider as well.

YAFI GOMP.

.....Andrzej

"There's only *one* RE."

Imagine if there were more?
Thank the lord for that small blessing....

 

Even though you haven't yet learned to be more selective with your quoting, Ali,
I like your thought processes!

;-)

.....Andrzej

"There's only *one* RE."

Imagine if there were more?
Thank the lord for that small blessing....

 

Here's another little factoid that I wasn't aware of till last week.

Which nation is the largest supplier of crude oil to the USA?

Yup....Canada.

Now isn't that interesting.....


.....Andrzej

"There's only *one* RE."

Imagine if there were more?
Thank the lord for that small blessing....

 

Ah...the eloquence of these replies is a beauty to behold.

One wishes for some creative insults sometimes. Along the lines of the famous
line: "I refuse to engage in a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent".

Now why does that ring a bell?

YAFI GOMP runs rampant.

.....Andrzej

"There's only *one* RE."

Imagine if there were more?
Thank the lord for that small blessing....

 

Blame the alcohol. <g>

Ali

 

How about I refuse to argue with idiots, they will bring you down to
their level, and then beat you with experience?

I'm so confused about Canada Day. Is this the once a year thing where
everyone argues over who's oil is whom's? Or who's on top, who's
biggest? Where everyone goes to hide when there's a draft, etc., etc.?
And, I'm a lousy British subject, aren't I? Should know these
things....

I didn't bother to Google Canada Day, too busy with other things right
now....but certainly will soon.

 

On Tue, 4 Jul 2006 10:32:46 -0400, Andrzej Jan Taramina wrote

Be careful of how loud you say that. You probably wouldn't like the Bush
administration's approach to bringing you democracy.

 

Or their warped definition of the term, for that matter.

Ali

 

You mean the holding of elections, the guy with the most votes winning
and a Pres with the biggest percentage of the population voting for him
since WWII. Aye, terrible.

 

What country would that be? Certainly not the US.