You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front Economy
Oil Innovations Pump New Life Into Old Wells
2007-03-06
Very long article in the NYT about oil reserves, and how the pessimists once again have been demonstrated to be wrong. Just the first part here; hit the link for the rest.

Why does this article matter? We'll need oil for the next fifty years (at least), and to the extent processes like the ones noted in the article can generate more domestic oil, the better off we are.
BAKERSFIELD, Calif. — The Kern River oil field, discovered in 1899, was revived when Chevron engineers here started injecting high-pressured steam to pump out more oil. The field, whose production had slumped to 10,000 barrels a day in the 1960s, now has a daily output of 85,000 barrels.

In Indonesia, Chevron has applied the same technology to the giant Duri oil field, discovered in 1941, boosting production there to more than 200,000 barrels a day, up from 65,000 barrels in the mid-1980s.

And in Texas, Exxon Mobil expects to double the amount of oil it extracts from its Means field, which dates back to the 1930s. Exxon, like Chevron, will use three-dimensional imaging of the underground field and the injection of a gas — in this case, carbon dioxide — to flush out the oil.

Within the last decade, technology advances have made it possible to unlock more oil from old fields, and, at the same time, higher oil prices have made it economical for companies to go after reserves that are harder to reach. With plenty of oil still left in familiar locations, forecasts that the worldÂ’s reserves are drying out have given way to predictions that more oil can be found than ever before.

In a wide-ranging study published in 2000, the U.S. Geological Survey estimated that ultimately recoverable resources of conventional oil totaled about 3.3 trillion barrels, of which a third has already been produced. More recently, Cambridge Energy Research Associates, an energy consultant, estimated that the total base of recoverable oil was 4.8 trillion barrels. That higher estimate — which Cambridge Energy says is likely to grow — reflects how new technology can tap into more resources.

“It’s the fifth time to my count that we’ve gone through a period when it seemed the end of oil was near and people were talking about the exhaustion of resources,” said Daniel Yergin, the chairman of Cambridge Energy and author of a Pulitzer Prize-winning history of oil, who cited similar concerns in the 1880s, after both world wars and in the 1970s. “Back then we were going to fly off the oil mountain. Instead we had a boom and oil went to $10 instead of $100.”
Posted by:Steve White

#13  I used to work on environmental issues from the "injection" side of the fence. Let me tell ya, there's oil EVERYWHERE. There are even patches of small mom & pop operations up in Kentucky, over in Tennessee, and actually one of the Southeast's largest fields using the injection of liquids is in the panhandle of Florida. Granted the small fries up in KY are only pumping a few barrels/day per well, but get that price back up and there may be new speculation.

I cut out an article on world "proven reserves" from the Atlanta Journal-Constitution in 2004 (based on 2003 data). It broke down all the oil producing nations by their size reserves (and gave more specific import, demand, etc. data on the U.S.). What struck me was the different colored bar for Canada. You add in tar sands oil, and WHAMMO, Canada suddenly becomes the world's SECOND largest reserve, right behind Saudi! Like others more eloquently said, it's all in how much we wanna pay for it (and who has the military to protect it).
Posted by: BA   2007-03-06 21:27  

#12  . . . we will never run out of oil, though at some point it will become too expensive to use.

Right you are--and, around the point where the cost of oil exceeds the cost of the alternatives, things will get cut over to run on alternate fuels. The "peak oil" crowd seems to believe there are no substitutes, and no substitutes can ever possibly be invented. Awfully pessimistic view of human ingenuity, that.

(Unless, of course, your purpose in espousing "peak oil" theories is to get everyone to abandon this icky civilization of SUVs and air conditioners and other technological stuff, hatred for which burns in the depths of your Luddite soul with the white-hot fire of a thousand burning sparkplugs. Then, despair over technology is merely a means to your desired end: a virtuous preindustrial civilization where you get to be one of the feudal overlords.)
Posted by: Mike   2007-03-06 17:15  

#11  Then there's the possibility of a great earth fart.
Posted by: wxjames   2007-03-06 11:26  

#10  The article notes, and gorb notes, that CO2 is used to inject into some of these oil fields.

A number of coal based electrical generating plants are experimenting with the CO2 injection, not necessarily to recover oil, but mostly to sequester the CO2. Its pretty expensive if new wells have to be drilled but seems technically doable. Also the migration of the CO2 underground has to be monitored, which is also a challenge.
Posted by: mhw   2007-03-06 08:44  

#9  It's all about economics. I've stated to people many times that we will never run out of oil, though at some point it will become too expensive to use. In the meantime, let the market do its wonders (as shown in the article): new sources, new technologies, etc.
Posted by: Spot   2007-03-06 08:25  

#8  All kinds of world oil news today: Hugo Chavez wants to prove that Venezuela — not Saudi Arabia — holds the largest oil reserves in the world.
Experts have long speculated that heavy oil and bitumen deposits in Venezuela's Orinoco River basin may contain more than 235 billion barrels of commercially extractable petroleum. If that amount can be certified by outside experts and added to conventional reserves, Venezuela would reach 316 billion barrels, moving past No. 1 Saudi Arabia, which holds 262 billion barrels, according to the Oil and Gas Journal.

Venezuela's production falls so far short of Saudi Arabia's that its reserves don't matter as much. Being named No. 1 "might make Venezuelans feel better, but I don't see how it has any impact," said Amy Myers Jaffe of Rice University's Baker Institute. "What you have in the ground is only important if you can take it out of the ground and sell it."
Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418   2007-03-06 07:00  

#7  Yet another innovation puts extra fuel in a trucker's tank. Wonders will never cease.
Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418   2007-03-06 06:03  

#6  The current link to the old article includes [gasp!] a correction:

Correction: March 6, 2007

A front-page article yesterday about technology advances that made it possible to unlock more oil from old fields misstated Saudi ArabiaÂ’s total reserves, which are about a quarter of the worldÂ’s proven total. It is 260 billion barrels, not million.


Billion, schmillion - It's all global warming anyway!

Posted by: Bobby   2007-03-06 05:42  

#5  This is a dupe of a post from yesterday, which, strangely enough, got no comments at all. Steve's got a magic touch, either that, or Rantburgers don't like clicking on links. A link to this article is here.
The pessimists have not been demonstrated wrong. If the Peak Oil theory is true, it can be known only in retrospect. The theory essentially states at some point world oil production will stop rising & then decline. If the theory is true, what will follow are sporadic shortages, oil price spikes and economic decline unless mitigating measures are taken (such as conservation). Economists just hate to predict things like that. The debate is not about the straw man of "running out of oil" but about how much oil will cost, how hard it will be to extract, and the political & military price that will have to be paid to maintain the world oil economy.
"Oil reserves" are imaginary. The USGS has one estimate, Cambridge Energy has another. A nice thing about reserves is their infinite flexibility. Actual production is something that can be measured, and is usually left out in rah-rah articles like the one cited.
Don't click on my last link. Be happy. It's all good.
Posted by: Anguper Hupomosing9418   2007-03-06 04:40  

#4  Eww. Scotchbrite pad, please . . . .
Posted by: gorb   2007-03-06 03:21  

#3  gorb, gimme an oil well and I could surely contribute an ample supply of greenhouse gasses. ;-)

Oh, you said pump, not dump... no matter, offer still stands. ;-)
Posted by: twobyfour   2007-03-06 02:54  

#2  Why don't we pump our greenhouse gases into the oil wells instead? Duh!
Posted by: gorb   2007-03-06 01:42  

#1  I was unaware of the use of gas or steam, but "water flooding" of formations is a technique that has been going on for many years here in the States.
Posted by: Besoeker   2007-03-06 00:51  

00:00