Tag: Oil Reserves

Iraq Runs Out Of Gas

I wish I was writing about the end of the Iraq War but sadly that will go on and on…..but this time I am writing about Iraq’s use of nat gas for the society.

I recently read an article about Iraq that I found odd….especially for a country with massive oil reserves.

Iraq’s capital Baghdad and other cities are at risk of serious power shortages after Iran slashed gas exports, the electricity ministry said on Sunday, potentially placing further pressure on the government of Prime Minister Mustafa al-Kadhimi.

Iran has reduced gas exports to Iraq to five million cubic metres from 50 million cubic metres two weeks ago citing unpaid bills, a ministry spokesman said.

It also officially informed Iraq’s electricity ministry on Sunday that it plans to cut shipments further to three million cubic metres, the spokesman said.

Iraq has lost around 6,550 megawatts of electricity, spokesman Ahmed Moussa said.

Iraq’s daily consumption during peak hours of winter reaches around 19,000 megawatts while the country generates around 11,000 megawatts, replying on imports to fill the gap, he said.

(reuters.com)

Seriously?

A country with millions of barrels of oil reserves and they need to import energy from Iran……Why?

Iraq cannot afford to heat or any domestic energy….could it have anything to do with 2008 and the return of big oil to Iraq?

I know…what?

This explains what I am talking about……https://lobotero.com/2008/06/20/big-oil-to-return-to-iraq/

The deals are that big oil returns and they run off with most of the profits….thanx to something called a “PSA”…..and I educated my readers about this as well….https://lobotero.com/2007/03/11/who-gets-iraqs-oil/

If for some unknown reason you would like another take on what happened to Iraq’s oil….then maybe this will satisfy your curiosity….https://theconversation.com/iraq-what-happened-to-the-oil-after-the-war-62188

Now I ask why if there is so much oil in Iraq why they cannot produce crude and nat gas for their consumption?

Does their lack of sufficient energy for the nation have anything to do with big oil and the PSA or is it the prices are too low for the production to be profitable?

The most important is….why would a nation with massive oil reserves need to import energy from another oil producing country?

Time for Iraq to be in control of their own reserves…..

I Read, I Write, You Know

“lego ergo scribo”

Just Fracking Great!

I do not normally write on the environment much for it is one of those issues that little info goes a long way…..few people want to face the fact that our environment is in trouble…..which is okay with me for I will be long dead by the time it all goes to crap and will not effect me at all…

There has been a running debate on the use of fracking to expel low quality oil from sand…..some say it will save the Us and others say that it will be our salvation….salvation from what they are not so clear but it will save us…..from ourselves I am guessing…….there are lots of sources of contention over the practice so I thought I would add one more……

(Newser) – Add this to ongoing debate about the merits and potential dangers of fracking: A Duke study uncovered high levels of radioactivity in water and sediment downstream from a fracking treatment plant in Pennsylvania, reports LiveScience. The researchers discovered the unexpected levels of radium in a creek near the Josephine Brine Treatment Facility. While radium is a naturally occurring radioactive metal, levels were 200 times higher than those found upstream of the plant, reports USA Today.

“We were surprised by the magnitude of radioactivity,” says a co-author of the study published in Environmental Science & Technology. He called for more such sites to be investigated. Wastewater treatment plants can remove most of the radioactivity but not all, say the researchers, who traced the water in their study back to the state’s large Marcellus Shale Formation. (Click to read about a Department of Energy study from earlier this year that found no dangers to drinking water near fracking sites. The fracking boom, meanwhile, is helping the US overtake Russia as the world’s largest energy producer.)

No matter what you think…I just do not see the advantage of injecting high pressure fluid into the earth’s crust and not expect some sort of natural reaction to the practice……we will eventually see just how good or bad the system is in the near future…….thoughts?

Thanx For Misleading Ads

Daily Agitator

Subject”  Marketing BS

Before the calls for my head start….I am NOT saying that Iran does NOT have devices that harm our troops….I am pointing out the lies and deception used to sell you a product or idea or whatever it is these liars use to influence…..

I recently saw an ad on the tube put on by Vote Vet…it is all about the explosive devices that the troops face in the ME and then they say the if oil goes up $1 then Iran gets another $1.5 billion to use on developing more explosives to use against out troops…..this is an ad to promote an alt energy plan for the US…..the problem I have with this is that the US gets NO direct oil from Iran and if we develop a program that we do not need ME oil it still will not make the troops safer…they will still get their money and they will still develop deadly devices to be used on our troops…..

Yes, there is more!

Another ad for the tube has doctors doing nimble gymnastics as they approach a patient and the voice over says that Doctors are the real heroes…..the problem I have with this one is that heroes are people to do a thing without thought of how it benefits them…..I have met NO doctors that fit into that category…..they became doctors for no reason only….THE MONEY!

I know it is just Marketing……but the point it is our whole lives we are lied to on every side…..politicians….salesmen…..media…..everyone lies to everyone…….this is the society that we have created……full of illusion and fecal matter…….

I know I am farting in the wind….but we all have to have something to bitch about….Happy Mother’s Day…..

Arctic Energy Sources

Across the globe, reserves of oil and gas that were previously regarded as uneconomical are being actively explored and developed. From the Arctic to East Asia to the South Atlantic, untapped billions of barrels of oil are attracting the interests of energy companies and speculative finance capital, seeking to take advantage of the high price of crude oil.

One of the greatest potential oil and gas bonanzas is to be found beneath the Arctic Ocean. A report issued by the United States Geological Survey (USGS), 24 July estimated that the Arctic region holds around 90 billion barrels of oil—equal to the total proven reserves of Russia, the world’s second biggest oil producer.

Up to 30 percent of the world’s unproven natural gas deposits could also lie beneath the ice, as well as a possible one-fifth of untapped reserves of natural gas liquids. To date, most of the Arctic Ocean is international water, covered all year by a thick ice sheet.

Russia, like all countries around the North Pole, claims sovereignty over the seas up to 200-nautical miles (370 km) from its coast. To reinforce its claim over a further swathe of the Arctic, in 2007 a scientific submarine dropped the Russian flag under the North Pole as part of a geological survey of the seabed.

Russia recently confirmed that it regularly sends a fleet of around eight nuclear-powered ice-breakers to patrol in the Arctic Ocean. The vessels are capable of ploughing through eight-foot thick ice and can stay at sea for months on end.

Russia’s increased activity in the Arctic has raised concerns in Washington that it is losing out in the race for control over the region. Coast Guard Commandant Admiral Thad Allen commented on Russia’s ice-breaker activity in the Arctic.

Just another confrontation with Russia in the making.  Between oil and missiles, there whole chest thumping thingy is just the beginning of yet another “Cold War”, only there will be a new name for the same types of stand-offs.

Democrats Scramble To Find A Policy On Oil

With 70% of the American people now supporting a policy of drilling offshore, the Dems have got to find a way to include it in their schtick.

With the politics of energy shifting as rapidly as gasoline prices, Democrats, led by Barack Obama, are retreating from long-held positions and scrambling to offer distressed voters more immediate relief from spiraling costs.

The change has been most striking on the campaign trail, where Obama said in a speech yesterday that he would abandon his past position and support tapping the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to quickly cut prices at the gasoline pump.

His presidential campaign later released a statement warning that the “doubling of oil prices in the past year is a crisis for millions of Americans.”

Obama’s reversal on tapping the national stockpile of crude oil comes just days after he said, for the first time, that he would agree to some offshore drilling as part of a broader energy-policy compromise with Republicans, including John McCain, who has supported additional drilling.

Those shifts by Obama are indicative of the pressure politicians of both parties – but especially Democrats – are under to develop specific, short-term energy proposals in the face of rising costs. Against that backdrop, politicians risk looking insensitive if they put forth only solutions that could take years to hit the pump.

That jockeying reflects a shift in public opinion that has upended policy debates as gas prices have soared and the economy has soured. In California, where opposition to offshore drilling is widespread, a poll last month by the Public Policy Institute of California showed 51 percent of respondents favoring more drilling – up 10 percentage points since July 2007, and the first time since the question was first posed in 2003 that more Californians favor offshore drilling than oppose it.

But the reality, there is no way that the US would become oil independent with either of these plans.

The Oil Mirage

I was sent this post in an email from a friend in New York.

If gasoline were selling for $2 a gallon today, President Bush’s decision to lift the ban on oil drilling off the Atlantic and Pacific coasts most likely would have caused an uproar. But with gasoline at more than $4 a gallon, and seemingly rising every day, the response to Mr. Bush’s directive has been muted at best. At worst, it is drawing support from various circles, including Congress, as lawmakers react to the growing public alarm over energy costs.

But this is a time for responsible leadership, and Congress must rise to the occasion. It’s one thing for Mr. Bush to seize an opportunity to open more acreage to the oil companies. He’s been pro-exploration from the moment he entered the Oval Office. But it’s quite another for responsible members of Congress to start wavering on the issue of offshore drilling out of fear of voter backlash at home. They need to stand firm.

Increasing the supply of domestic oil is, at best, a feeble solution to a global energy crisis. Under Mr. Bush’s plan, oil companies would be able to drill for an estimated 10 billion barrels of oil pinpointed in areas now off limits to drilling. But even if such a rich source materialized and were tapped, there is no guarantee the oil would flow to the U.S. market. Instead, it would become part of the global oil supply and subject to the price fluctuations of global demand. Assuming there is no let-up in demand by China and India, the impact on prices would be minimal at best. Meanwhile, the U.S. coastal landscape would be degraded.

If only some lawmakers would talk bluntly about this issue. If only some of them would dare to say that even though $4-a-gallon gasoline is a burden on most family budgets, it is, in its own way, a blessing as well. The higher cost of fuel has made Americans more conservation conscious. It has all but driven the gas-guzzling SUV into extinction. It has increased ridership on mass transit systems. It has made cities more attractive for workers to live in, and the suburbs, along with their daily commutes, less attractive. If that trend continues, suburban and ex-urban sprawl may at last be curbed.

Then there are the health benefits. If Americans drive less and burn less fuel, the air will be cleaner and there will be fewer respiratory ailments. And there are economic benefits. Fewer cars means less wear and tear on the infrastructure, and thus less cost for maintenance and repair.

Congress can make these points, and more, by refusing to go along with Mr. Bush and lift the drilling moratorium. That is to say, Congress must act responsibly even if Mr. Bush refuses to do so.

What Will Be The Future Of Energy?

In 2030, according to the U.S. Department of Energy, world “liquids” demand is expected to reach 117.6 million barrels per day. Of this amount, unconventional fuels – synthetic liquids derived from tar sands, shale rock, and biofuels – may provide a total of 10.5 million barrels. That leaves 107.1 million to be supplied by conventional petroleum. But what if global oil output has fallen to 60-70% of that amount by 2030, as projected by many analysts? Under those circumstances, no amount of oil from Alaska or the outer continental shelf will be able to save this country (or the rest of the world) from a catastrophic energy crisis.

Some say that any palliative is worth the expense as we head toward certain disaster. But this is not a logical response. Knowing that the age of petroleum is drawing to a close, it is far better to devote our talents and investment dollars on hastening the arrival of its successor, rather than prolonging the agony of oil’s decline.

At this point, we cannot be absolute certain of the dominant energy source of the post-petroleum era. Will it be the Solar Age or the Biofuels Age or the Hydrogen Age? But we do know that it will revolve around some constellation of renewable, climate-friendly, domestically-produced supplies. From now on, America’s top priority in the energy field must be to explore all potential components of this new energy future and move swiftly to develop those with the greatest promise.

2030 is 22 yrs from now and will the next president truly be the author of a new and more environment friendly energy policy? I am thinking…no they will not…..somehow, something will happen to move this to the back burner….yet again.

Oil Reserve Delivers To Stop

Jittery about a political backlash over gasoline costs as prices set yet another record Tuesday, Congress voted to halt deliveries to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve in defiance of President Bush.

The action was expected to have a modest effect on pump prices, saving motorists an estimated 2 to 5 cents a gallon, backers said. But its overwhelming support, including from Bush’s usual GOP allies, underscored the potentcy of fuel costs as a campaign issue this year.

The measure is likely to be one of the few Congress approves this year in response to public angst at the pump as Democrats and Republicans agreed on little else Tuesday to bring down prices.

“Stopping the fill of the Strategic Petroleum Reserve has been tried before, and there is no evidence that it will affect the price of oil or gasoline in a meaningful way,” White House spokesman Scott Stanzel said Tuesday. But he said Bush would not veto it.

Senators approved the measure by a veto-proof majority of 97 to 1. The two Democratic presidential candidates, Sens. Barack Obama of Illinois and Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York, returned to the Capitol from the campaign trail to vote for the measure. Sen. John McCain of Arizona, the presumptive GOP nominee, supported the measure but was absent for the vote.

Watch the price of oil to see if this will have an effect.  Unbelievable, the Senate can work together on issues!