Fair ~ 57°F  
Login | Register
Tuesday, November 25, 2014

Oil or ? and where should we drill?

Posted Wednesday, March 21, 2012, at 7:24 PM

I'm sure there are those of you that remember my T. Boone Pickens blog. Well, I'm going to expand on that. For those of you who feel absolutely committed to gasoline, fine! I could care less! Me, I want to be able to have a CHOICE! Big oil helped write the regulations that prevent me from converting my vehicle to CNG. This is WRONG! Since when has it become American to deny Americans a choice in their fuels for their PRIVATE vehicles??? I could easily convert my PRIVATE vehicle to methanol, but I can't legally build a still to make my methanol. How can this be American? Or is it considered UNAMERICAN to not be a slave to big oil? It seems everyone is screaming about personal choice, but when those of us that want to exercise our choice we are blocked by the companies you seem to want to support. The same companies that have no allegiance to the USA. So I say to everyone that reads this blog that wants to respond, give it your best shot at justifying the denying me my right to make a choice as to the fuel I wish to use in my PRIVATE vehicle.

 

Now that I have gotten that of my chest, my next opinion. Where should we drill for oil? It has been stated over and over the the oilfield in the Dakotas has more than enough oil to meet out needs for a good long while. So, if this is true, why drill on PUBLIC land? Drill and frack on private land to your hearts content.

if it were ever necessary to drill on the PUBLICS land, then not a single drop of that oil should ever be exported! It belongs to the people, not the oil companies! In addition to that, the price would have to be regulated to prevent gouging if the world market prices skyrocket. This American oil on American Public lands. It is for the use and benefit of the American people only! Those of you who think that private companies should be able to lay claim to a public resource and sell it around the world and charge us, the owners of that resource a premium because the world market is high do not have the best interest of the nation in your hearts.

My feelings on this subject are not liberal, they are NATIONALISTIC!

THE TIME HAS COME FOR THE RAPING OF THE AMERICAN PEOPLE TO END!


Comments
Showing most recent comments first
[Show in chronological order instead]

For all you folks down there in Mountain Home, did you know you have a high pressure gas main running down Airbase Rd? Same side of the road as the new Auto Zone.

-- Posted by royincaldwell on Sat, Mar 24, 2012, at 8:16 AM

Warren, I have spent a great deal of time with crews from IGC doing corrosion checks on their transmission pipes. They and Williams take safety very seriously. Others not so much.

As for Enbridge, the cost to date is over 725 million with no end in sight. I posted the link with the picture of the breached piece of pipe.

When is a spill not a spill? Apparently when the pipeline company says it isn't a spill.

-- Posted by royincaldwell on Sat, Mar 24, 2012, at 7:26 AM

Roy: Appears as if pipeline safety is pretty darn excellent...except when it's not.

-- Posted by bondyweb on Fri, Mar 23, 2012, at 10:11 PM

Roy,

Two months ago, this appeared in a bay area newspaper:

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cg...

Here is a link to the actual NTSB report on the San Bruno explosion:

http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/summa...

There are numerous other media articles on the audit by California's Public Utilities agency and they ALL conclude that the original piece of the pipeline that FAILED revealed multiple deficiencies and violations of the original 1956 specifications for the pipeline and that PGE had NOT used available monies or technologies that COULD (and probably would) have shown the condition years before the tragic fire BEFORE they increased the pressure in that line to deliver more product and make more money...

In this case, it appears to be something in the range of HALF A BILLION ....

-- Posted by wh67 on Fri, Mar 23, 2012, at 8:47 PM

Cleanup by the numbers

1,147,323 gallons of oil collected

16.8 million gallons of oil/water collected and disposed

182,398 cubic yards soil/debris disposed

From March 7, 2012, Situation Report

Response History

Enbridge Energy Partners LLP (Enbridge) reported a 30-inch pipeline ruptured on Monday, July 26, 2010, near Marshall, Michigan. The release, estimated at 819,000 gallons, entered Talmadge Creek and flowed into the Kalamazoo River, a Lake Michigan tributary. Heavy rains caused the river to overtop existing dams and carried oil 30 miles downstream on the Kalamazoo River.

As the federal agency in charge of the response to the spill, EPA assumed a leadership role in the Unified Command and mobilized an Incident Management Team made up of federal, state and local agencies.

On July 27, the day after the spill was reported, EPA issued a legal order under the authority of the Clean Water Act directing Enbridge to conduct removal actions. EPA also ordered the company to produce documents and information relevant to EPA's investigation into the source, extent and nature of the oil spill.

On July 28, 2010, the spill was contained approximately 80 river miles from Lake Michigan.

Click to enlarge map

Submerged Oil Recovery Suspended for Season, Other Work to Continue During Winter

NOVEMBER 2011 - Submerged oil recovery work has been suspended for the winter due to low water and sediment temperatures. However, work will continue throughout the winter of 2011-2012 and will be focused on:

Click to see entire map of overbank tar patty and excavation locations

Excavation of oil-contaminated soil and weathered oil from the overbank areas,

Construction of oiled-sediment collection areas, and

Scientific studies to guide resumption of submerged oil recovery during spring/summer 2012.

As of Oct. 31, 2011, more than 1,139,000 gallons of oil are estimated to have been contained in the contaminated waste streams generated by cleanup work. These waste streams include oily water, soil, sediment, and debris.

EPA, working with state and local agencies, has directed Enbridge's oil recovery efforts since July 26, 2010, when a pipeline rupture near Marshall, Michigan, caused the largest inland oil spill in Midwest history. Government efforts ultimately prevented the oil spill from reaching Lake Michigan.

At the height of the response activities in September 2010, more than 2,500 EPA, state, local and Enbridge personnel and contractors were working along 35 miles of impacted river and shoreline. EPA continues to lead the effort and more than 400 people will continue to work on the cleanup over the winter.

Enbridge will be required to repay the government for all response costs.

-- Posted by royincaldwell on Fri, Mar 23, 2012, at 6:21 PM

Well, Warren, San Bruno Ca. now has a whole different perspective on pipeline safety.

SW, like I said, what people do with their private property is their business.

-- Posted by royincaldwell on Fri, Mar 23, 2012, at 3:52 PM

NOW BONDY ......you know your in trouble for posting that last one........he doesnt like it he can move.....right????? personal property rights dont count .... HMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM

-- Posted by lamont on Fri, Mar 23, 2012, at 11:09 AM

President Obama cannot stop the OK-TX portion of the XL Pipeline? But the land owners can.

"Michael Bishop, a retired Marine who owns 20 acres in Nacogdoches County, hired an attorney to fight the project after learning that the route would cut through his orchard and garden.

"It's going to totally disrupt my life as I know it," he said. "Is it fair for a foreign-owned company to come over here and take land for their private use and their personal gain?"

http://www.star-telegram.com/2012/02/21/...

-- Posted by bondyweb on Fri, Mar 23, 2012, at 10:47 AM

Here's a link about oil produced here in our country

http://money.cnn.com/2012/02/27/news/eco...

-- Posted by MsMarylin on Fri, Mar 23, 2012, at 10:33 AM

Well, it looks like part of the Keystone pipeline is being built already. Obama couldn't stop it because it's being built on private land. But now he is taking credit for it, and directing his energy czar to "cut through the red tape" (the red tape his administration created), to get this pipeline built. Nothing like a looming re-election campaign to get politicians to do what the people want!

-- Posted by Second Wind on Fri, Mar 23, 2012, at 9:59 AM

Roy,

The CNG you want to use is delivered to the TWO commercial delivery stations in the Treasure Valley via a pipeline that has been in service for OVER 50 years. It is buried in soil that is highly corrosive itself. The line is coated with .... TAR and cardboard.

If that big CNG cannister between Meridian and Caldwell springs a leak, we are all in trouble.

On the other hand, the pipelines and the pump stations that move the product from the wells to the CNG storage tanks are inspected constantly with high tech gadgets designed since the lines were buried..

So do we buy wool underwear or move to Mexico?

-- Posted by wh67 on Fri, Mar 23, 2012, at 8:28 AM

Roy:

Gallop in a recent poll says "Americans are nearly twice as likely to say the United States should put greater emphasis on the development of alternative energy supplies such as wind and solar power (59%) as to say the U.S. should emphasize production of more oil, gas, and coal supplies (34%)."

So, I too "Can't wait to get a president in that will actually LISTEN to the majority instead of pandering to the minority!"

-- Posted by bondyweb on Fri, Mar 23, 2012, at 6:42 AM

Roy: As Rick Santorum suggested, when "Barack O'Romney" is elected in November we can look at another 4 years of the same old, same old.

-- Posted by bondyweb on Fri, Mar 23, 2012, at 6:29 AM

Interesting set of comments. Now some answers.

1st, I am allowed my opinion. I set no policy, but I am allowed a voice. Unless you seek to deprive me of my rights under the Constitution you hold so dear, I will continue to voice my opinion.

2nd, Oil sands, tar sands or, more technically, bituminous sands, are a type of unconventional petroleum deposit. The oil sands are loose sand or partially consolidated sandstone containing naturally occurring mixtures of sand, clay, and water, saturated with a dense and extremely viscous form of petroleum technically referred to as bitumen (or colloquially tar due to its similar appearance, odour and colour). Natural bitumen deposits are reported in many countries, but in particular are found in extremely large quantities in Canada.[1][2] Other large reserves are located in Kazakhstan and Russia. Total natural bitumen reserves are estimated at 249.67 billion barrels (39.694109 m3) globally, of which 176.8 billion barrels (28.11109 m3), or 70.8%, are in Canada.[1]

Oil sands reserves have only recently been considered to be part of the world's oil reserves, as higher oil prices and new technology enable them to be profitably extracted and upgraded to usable products. They are often referred to as unconventional oil or crude bitumen, in order to distinguish the bitumen extracted from oil sands from the free-flowing hydrocarbon mixtures known as crude oil traditionally produced from oil wells.

The crude bitumen contained in the Canadian oil sands is described by Canadian authorities as "petroleum that exists in the semi-solid or solid phase in natural deposits. Bitumen is a thick, sticky form of crude oil, so heavy and viscous (thick) that it will not flow unless heated or diluted with lighter hydrocarbons. At room temperature, it is much like cold molasses".[3] The World Energy Council (WEC) defines natural bitumen as "oil having a viscosity greater than 10,000 centipoises under reservoir conditions and an API gravity of less than 10 API".[1] The Orinoco Belt in Venezuela is sometimes described as oil sands, but these deposits are non-bituminous, falling instead into the category of heavy or extra-heavy oil due to their lower viscosity.[4] Natural bitumen and extra-heavy oil differ in the degree by which they have been degraded from the original crude oil by bacteria and erosion. According to the WEC extra-heavy oil has "a gravity of less than 10 API and a reservoir viscosity of no more than 10,000 centipoises".[1]

Making liquid fuels from oil sands requires energy for steam injection and refining. This process generates two to four times the amount of greenhouse gases per barrel of final product as the "production" of conventional oil.[5] If combustion of the final products is included, the so-called "Well to Wheels" approach, oil sands extraction, upgrade and use emits 10 to 45% more greenhouse gases than conventional crude.

This article shows what tar sands oil can do to a pipeline. http://blog.nwf.org/2011/11/breaking-new...

You may not like the source, but it does report facts. http://grist.org/oil/2011-05-12-lets-sup...

Lastly, world oil prices. Tar sands and oil obtained by fracking require oil prices to stay above the 70-80 dollars a barrel mark just to break even. No matter how much of these 2 oils you flood the market with, countries like Saudi Arabia can flood the market short term with oil at $50 a barrel and still turn a profit. They will make both types of oil an unprofitable venture. The days of cheap oil are over!

Lastly, allowing the pipeline industry to decide what is a spill and what isn't, is like letting the foxes guard the hen house.

I am well aware how deeply oil is ingrained in our everyday life, it doesn't need to be pointed out to me.

I am also well aware of other, older environmental disasters that to this day still plague some parts of this country. If you would like an education of sorts, research Fairchild Camera and National Semiconductor, and the ongoing cleanup operations in the Santa Clara valley.

Rick Santorum said the earth is here for us to use, not protect. I believe the opposite is true. We can't put the oil genie back in the bottle, but we don't have to let it ruin the earth.

While 57% may approve of this pipeline project, using that logic is like the anti-gun folks using the logic that a majority of Americans oppose private ownership if high powered weapons, therefore it is justified banning them. It's a stretch, but you get my point. Majority's change frequently, facts seldom do.

-- Posted by royincaldwell on Fri, Mar 23, 2012, at 6:03 AM

Just to give you an idea, here are a few.

Gasoline, diesel, aviation fuel, credit cards, plastic bags, hair brushes, anti-freeze, motorcycle helmets, carpets, telephones, brake fluids, boats, glue, toilet seats, shampoo, household paint, dtergent bowls, fertilizer, explosives, car tires, artificial turf, boots, lipsyick, weed killer, parachutes, umbrellas, shower curtains, coats, artificial limbs, roads, bubble wrap, drink bottles, tooth brushes, life jackets, finish lines, tennis rackets, roller blades, lunch boxes, eye glasses, flower pots, toys, car seats, insulation, nail polish, hair spray, medicines, insect repellants, golf balls.

Sure, you can have a 'choice' whether or not to run your car off of CNG but, if you are going to go all holy on us, go all the way! Give up all the things I just listed!

Don't call oil evil but continue to use it other forms or in products where it's invisible to ya.

-- Posted by KentuckyTransplant on Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 10:35 PM

Roy, here's the problem with you running your car off of CNG or Fruity Pebbles for that matter. It's not going to save you that much in the long run. Sure it may save you $20-40/month but, you are still going to have to pay elevated prices for anything else such as groceries, hay (if you have horses), or anything else where gasoline is in the picture.

Until the world is flooded with oil, prices aren't going to come down. Do you realize how much of the everyday items you use are made using oil?

-- Posted by KentuckyTransplant on Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 10:17 PM

That may be Buckshot. Tell you what. How about we spill some of this synthetic crude into Mountain Home's aquifer and see how the locals like it. Have you read about the last spill involving this junk? Do you really believe the Canadians will sell this synthetic crude to us at a discount because they love us? Have you read the studies that show how fast it corrodes steel? Are you really willing to gamble with the water supply of 2 million Americans?

-- Posted by royincaldwell on Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 8:58 PM

We really should be working toward an alturnative, oil wont be around forever. But i sure as heck cant afford no $30,000 electric car.

-- Posted by shockwave on Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 6:39 PM

MsM, I will pay less than 50% for CNG. I have seen the InterMountain Gas Co. vehicles and taked to the drivers. No complaints about horsepower. They are also dual fuel vehicles.

SW, My problem with Keystone is 3 fold. 1st is that it is only to benefit Canadian Oil Companies get their product to the world market. They have no plans to give us any kind of a break. 2nd, the 20K jobs are short duration jobs. Total anticipated permanent jobs are about 20, and none are guaranteed to go to Americans. 3rd and most important. Synthetic crude is very corrosive and they have already had 1 spill from this stuff in a pipeline just over a year old. Cost to date is over 725 Million and they still aren't done cleaning it up. This was a small spill. The original route crossed over the only underground aquifer that supplies drinking water to over 2 million people. The odds are in favor of a major spill from this pipeline. The Canadian people don't even want it run across their land. We are being sold a bill of goods about this pipeline. Why should we expose our land to such a toxic mess?

Once again, American soil and American resources for Americans, not foreigners or profiteers! I think that should be clear enough as to my stand.

-- Posted by royincaldwell on Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 11:39 AM

Roy I asked Pat about converting to Natural Gas and he said you will loose 1/3 of horse power and get less mileage

-- Posted by MsMarylin on Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 10:55 AM

I also agree with KH gal that no one is "attacking" you when we disagree. We have strong feelings about what we think is going wrong in our country and so do you. My understanding is that people can put almost any kind of fuel they want in their cars. My husband just came back from Oklahoma and he said a lot of people there are using natural gas, because they have natural gas stations and refineries in that state. He said that when anyone uses alternatives fuels, they have to pay a tax stamp to the government for road use. Then there are the EPA rules, environmental regulations etc. I remember when Bush wanted to put oil refineries on all the old, closed down military bases but congress and the environmentalists blocked it. The government makes a ton of money off the big oil companies. They are the ones that are discouraging alternative fuels with all their regulations.

Because of refineries and transportation already in place, oil is still the major source. Most Americans want the Keystone pipeline and more drilling to remove us from our dependency on foreign oil. Drilling would provide thousands of jobs and, even if we exported some of the oil, help us pay off our enormous debt.

-- Posted by Second Wind on Thu, Mar 22, 2012, at 10:43 AM

More than one way to skin a cat. Invent something that no one else has thought of.

It wouldn't be illegal if no one has ever done it before. They have created fuel energy from chicken manure. I remember reading years ago, how a guy converted his car to running on that.

Or old cooking oil. There are quite of a few people who have done that.

We could tap the sewer systems of Washington to get enough poop to run the entire country for years. (Joke).

We are all patriots. Some of us are drummers and fife players, some carry the flag and others are soldiers. some of us get to ride the horses and others get to walk.

But in the time of great peril, as a country we move in the same direction except this one. Why?

Because we cease to value what has been given to us.

-- Posted by KH Gal on Wed, Mar 21, 2012, at 8:55 PM

Buckshot, your point is what? You failed to address methanol. My truck most certainly can carry the extra weight. I can't afford a new vehicle. The regulations were written specifically to prevent individuals converting.

-- Posted by royincaldwell on Wed, Mar 21, 2012, at 8:34 PM

Nice to see 2 positive comments. In my book NATIONALIST = PATRIOT!

-- Posted by royincaldwell on Wed, Mar 21, 2012, at 8:29 PM

Attacks? I always appreciate Roy's outlook. I might not agree and will say so. I like the public land theory.

We could put it into a Trust Fund for the American People. Every year we could vote where the monies should go. Pay down the debt, oil rebate or giving others a hand-up.

We should drill, take care of our own and tell those who want to continue to extort oil, to take a hike.

Big Oil Companies in America already have their piece of the pie. So do the members of Congress and any other politician. We have tried it their way and it has failed miserably.

Give the money that they are living on back to the American People. Take away their checkbooks and let us decide the budget. Goodness knows they can't seem to get it right.

-- Posted by KH Gal on Wed, Mar 21, 2012, at 8:14 PM

RIGHT ON......!!!!!!!!!!!! I AM SURE THE ATTACKS WILL COME.....WHAT TIME IS IT???????????

LATTER

-- Posted by lamont on Wed, Mar 21, 2012, at 7:44 PM


Respond to this blog

Posting a comment requires free registration. If you already have an account, enter your username and password below. Otherwise, click here to register.

Username:

Password:  (Forgot your password?)

Your comments:
Please be respectful of others and try to stay on topic.


A View From The Independent Side
Roy Pratt
Recent posts
Archives
Blog RSS feed [Feed icon]
Comments RSS feed [Feed icon]
Send email to Roy Pratt
Login
I'm an almost 61 year old transplant from California 6 1/2 years ago. I work in road construction, those dastardly flaggers. My family roots go back to New England farms, not the big city. The last town I lived in when in California grew from 16K to 40K in 10 years, and that was enough to drive me out. I don't engage in or tolerate name calling. Name calling reduces an adult discussion to grade school play yard level. I have never served in the military, but have family members who have, dating back to WW1. I am neither a Democrat nor a Republican. I am neither extremely Liberal or Conservative. I am raising my 16 year old grandson, not what I expected at this age, and dealing with those issues as well as my health and near retirement which are 2 things I intend to talk about. I decided to try my hand at this thanks to the warm welcome I have received on Mike's blog. When I take a position, I will defend it until I am shown that I am mistaken, and when that happens, I apologize. There are other things about me that will come out over time I'm sure.