Two years ago, America was importing about two thirds of its oil. Today, according to the Energy Information Administration, it imports less than half. And by 2017, investment bank Goldman Sachs predicts the US could be poised to pass Saudi Arabia and overtake Russia as the world's largest oil producer.
And this from the same source:
Amy Myers Jaffe of Rice University says in the next decade, new oil in the US, Canada and South America could change the center of gravity of the entire global energy supply.Another part of the reason we're not importing as much oil is because the economy sucks and there is less demand. Of course, silly me, that's all Bush's fault. The current administration wouldn't have any sort of responsibility in this regard.
"Some are now saying, in five or 10 years' time, we're a major oil-producing region, where our production is going up," she says.
The US, Jaffe says, could have 2 trillion barrels of oil waiting to be drilled. South America could hold another 2 trillion. And Canada? 2.4 trillion. That's compared to just 1.2 trillion in the Middle East and north Africa.
Jaffe says those new oil reserves, combined with growing turmoil in the Middle East, will "absolutely propel more and more investment into the energy resources in the Americas."
Russia is already feeling the growth of American energy, Jaffe says. As the U.S. produces more of its own natural gas, Europe is free to purchase liquefied natural gas the US is no longer buying.
"They're buying less natural gas from Russia," Jaffe says. "So Russia would only supply 10 percent of European natural gas demand by 2030. That means the Russians are no longer powerful."
The American energy boom, Jaffe says, could endanger many green-energy initiatives that have gained popularity in recent years. But royalties and revenue from U.S. production of oil and natural gas, she adds, could be used to invest in improving green technology. "We don't have the commercial technology now," she says, noting the recent bankruptcy of American solar companies like Solyndra.Heh. An article from NPR that ballyhoos the current administration's funneling the big bucks into non commercially viable industries even though they are "green?" Whoda thunk it?
"The point is you can't force a technology that's not commercial. Rather than subsidize things that are not going to be competitive, we need to actually use that money to do R&D to create technologies — the same way that the industries created these technologies to produce natural gas and it turned out so commercially successful."
Getting back to the oil patch, two terms bandied about are horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing (fracking) - and the combination of the two is the technological evolution that makes oil recovery from a "tight" formation possible.
Horizontal drilling differs from the standard method in that as the well is drilled, the bit can be directionally controlled. When the well is at the proper depth, it is turned so that eventually, the path goes from vertical to horizontal. From what I've heard - the well actually goes somewhat uphill rather than a perfect horizontal. This allows the oil to flow "downhill" to make pumping it easier. Notice how much deeper the oil well goes past the water table. This will become important later.
This is a video from Continental Resources explaining hydraulic fracturing. Now, I realize that this is nothing but a propaganda video to the more vehement of fracking's opponents, but it is based in fact rather than conjecture. Two things to note: The pic and video both came from their site, and this company is a customer of my company. http://www.contres.com/operations/technologies/hydraulic-fracturing
Another thing Continental has
come up with are
Eco-Pads. This is basically
bundling wells into one "pad" or
well site with all the
accoutrements such as storage
tanks, pumps, wellheads rather
than scattered over several
single pads, minimizing the
impact on the environment. I've
seen four wells on one pad with
them - and they aren't just
drilling into the Bakken
anymore, either. There is
another oil bearing formation
that is just now showing up on
the radar - the
Three Forks. Those four
wells were drilled into either
one, the other, or both, plus
they are also doing a sort of
"lateral" line technique - there
might be more than one
horizontal line in one well.
Now - addressing the concerns of
those against fracking. The
fracking occurs miles below the
water table. It has no effect on
the water table because it does
not open access through all
those miles of rock to get the
oil and gas into said water
table. The only way a well can
contaminate the water table is
if the well casing is poorly
made or breaks down at the
water table level - and both
are possible. However,
the oil industry has been
drilling oil wells right through
the water table for years now
with a pretty decent record of
safety as far as contamination
is concerned. Fracking a well
does not affect the
strata associated with the water
table. It's just too damn far
away!
Now, I'm not here to defend the
instances where a well casing
failed due to poor installation
or whatever. But to my mind,
people who suddenly find their
water blaming their water
smelling like gas after fracking
is done on wells in their area
need just a little more science
involved before the connection
can be made. Like real, hard
data. Was the water not
contaminated before the wells
were fracked? Is it now? What is
the chemical makeup of the
contaminant?
The large majority of petroleum
based water table contamination
occurs on the surface and seeps
down. Pipeline leakage or
failure, old storage tanks
leaking, point contamination
where oil has been continuously
dumped to saturation and migrate
down, oil spills and yes, oil
casing leakage have been
responsible for ground water
pollution. An old refinery in
Wichita was responsible for some
contamination several years ago,
for instance.
But fracking causing water
contamination directly? I'm
gonna need some hard data on
that, personally. Just because
both happen underground where we
can't see it doesn't make it
likely.