WTI Crude

Loading...

Brent Crude

Loading...

Natural Gas

Loading...

Gasoline

Loading...

Heating Oil

Loading...

Rotate device for more commodity prices

Alt Text

Oil Prices Rise As EIA Report Adds To OPEC Optimism

Oil prices rebounded on Wednesday…

Alt Text

Oil Dips – Is This The End Of The OPEC Rally?

Oil prices retreated on Tuesday…

The Unites States Possesses the Largest Energy Resources on Earth

A new report from the Congressional Research Service points out that in terms of total hydrocarbon resource, the US possesses the largest inventory of any nation on Earth. But under the Obama regime, an unstated but unrelenting program of "energy starvation" is being carried out -- from the DOE to the Department of Interior to the EPA, even including the NRC. It is one thing to be energy-poor because you lack the resources. It is quite another to intentionally cripple your own economy using half-baked policies of carbon hysteria, nuclear fear, and faux environmental crisis fabrication.

World Fossil Fuel Resources

America’s combined energy resources are, according to a new report from the Congressional Research Service (CSR), the largest on earth. They eclipse Saudi Arabia (3rd), China (4th) and Canada (6th) combined – and that’s without including America’s shale oil deposits and, in the future, the potentially astronomic impact of methane hydrates.

...if the White House is in any way serious about impacting the economic Black Hole that is the burgeoning national debt, reinvigorating business big-time, creating real jobs and restoring ebbing national wealth, the best shot by a distance if you’re American ... well, you’re standing on it, or rather above it.

...While the US is often depicted as having only a tiny minority of the world’s oil reserves at around 28 billion barrels (based on the somewhat misleading figure of ‘proven reserves’) according to the CRS in reality it has around 163 billion barrels. As Inhofe’s EPW press release comments, “That’s enough oil to maintain America’s current rates of production and replace imports from the Persian Gulf for more than 50 years”. Next up, there’s coal. The CRS report reveals America’s reserves of coal are unsurpassed, accounting for over 28 percent of the world’s coal. Much of it is high quality too. The CRS estimates US recoverable coal reserves at around 262 billion tons (not including further massive, difficult to access, Alaskan reserves). Given the US consumes around 1.2 billion tons a year, that’s a couple of centuries of coal use, at least.

...In 2009 the CRS upped its 2006 estimate of America’s enormous natural gas deposits by 25 percent to around 2,047 trillion cubic feet, a conservative figure given the expanding shale gas revolution. At current rates of use that’s enough for around 100 years. Then there is still the, as yet largely publicly untold, story of methane hydrates to consider, a resource which the CRS reports alludes to as “immense...possibly exceeding the combined energy content of all other known fossil fuels.” According to the Inhofe’s EPW, “For perspective, if just 3 percent of this resource can be commercialized ... at current rates of consumption, that level of supply would be enough to provide America’s natural gas for more than 400 years.”

strong>Free Oil Industry Investment Report: Our Fracking industry guide shows you the companies and strategies that will enable you to generate excellent returns in what will be one of the most profitable sectors of the energy industry over the coming 18 months. Click here for your Free report.

...With 85 percent of global energy set to come from fossil fuels till at least 2035 no matter what wishful thinkers may prefer, current US energy policy – much like European – is pure political pantomime. _EnergyTribune

American Oil Potential

By. Al Fin




Back to homepage


Leave a comment
  • Anonymous on March 29 2011 said:
    The limit to how much fossil fuel mankind can burn each year may not be limited by the amount of fossil fuel available. But there may very well be a limit to how much carbon dioxide the earth's atmosphere can absorb. Even if global warming per se isn't a problem, Mother Nature may well think of other tricks to play on us if the level of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere keeps rising. For this reason I believe we must not forclose the nuclear option. We will of course have to review and upgrade safeguards to keep radioactivity inside the reactor building where it belongs, no matter how powerful any earthquake or tsunami near the plant happens to be.
  • Anonymous on March 30 2011 said:
    Well, that's it for me and the CRS. Evidently they have become some kind of crank colony. Nobody with a brain in their head should accept the figures on oil in this article.But let me say that I understand the basic problem, which is the pathetic lack of education in energy economics, which in turn causes 'researchers' to latch on to and repeat any fruitcake remark about energy that comes along. That's why I religiously limit my work to the things I know about.
  • Anonymous on March 30 2011 said:
    I would like to pose a solution to the above two comments. First, volcano's have spuded more filth in the air than anything ever. Two, chicago since 1980 has forced its taxis to use LP instead of gas. The gov will not allow us to convert but only a certain amount of car or truck to this tech. Why. Ask Pickens. The other view, let us use all the oil, coal we have. Do not import. Do you really want to stop middle east bs. Shut them down. There is nothing to fight for and you cut off the money. No more problem. Why did we allow Brasil/Chaives to obtain 2 bill from us or obama. When he shuts down our own companys. 5 to 6 dollars a gallon here we come. The larger picture is this, over whelm US with dept and importing oil, crush the economy or middle class and let Soros do what he did to England.That is the story behind the curtain. Shut them all down, use what we have, let our brains come up in 20yrs a fuel that is self sustaining. Amen
  • Anonymous on March 30 2011 said:
    Energy policy will stay a political issue for very long time. The reason is quite simple: who controls energy sources is the one whom everybody listen. There is always a chance that those persons could take into account all possible facts that may help to mankind to survive.
  • Anonymous on March 30 2011 said:
    If thats the case , then why did a major oil company , cap a new oil field in 2002 ( in Calif ) instead of developing it ???? & that was under bush , it is cheaper & has been for them to import , they pay less in tax & make more profit..
  • Anonymous on March 30 2011 said:
    I'm writing to you from the shadow of Chernobyl, just down-wind of Sosnovy Bor. We're now waiting for the fall-out cloud from Fukushima (a reactor built by GE). Tomorrow I'm returning to Dunquerque, one of the world's largest and dirtiest run-down nuclear power-stations. Every three years there is a nuclear accident some-where. We have one world; and one environment. Coal or Oil or Gas or Nuclear, it's all the same. The sooner america learns to cut their consumption the better it will be for the rest of mankind. The survival of the human race depends on it.
  • Anonymous on March 30 2011 said:
    "then why did a major oil company , cap a new oil field in 2002 ( in Calif ) instead of developing it ????" If you know all the facts about this 'field' then why didn't you name the 'Major Oil Company' and the name of the 'Oil Field' the company capped? You can just through out Random facts and expect to be taken seriously...by the way, you can't just cap an 'oil field', you can 'plug' an oil well, or a series of wells, but that's only done when the production numbers for those wells are no longer profitable.
  • Anonymous on March 30 2011 said:
    Mr. Batchelder:I am against any scheme to try to solve our problems by cutting off oil imports from the middle east. Reason is, oil is traded on world markets and if Saudi Arabia, Libya, etc. can't sell oil to us Americans directly, they will have no trouble finding other markets. We'll end up hurting ourselves more than them.
  • Anonymous on March 30 2011 said:
    Solve many problems at once. Federal Gov. owns millions of acres of energy rich land. Lease this land out to companies to get the oil, gas, coal, etc. Feds get royalties from companies. Royalties used to help balance the budget & reduce federal debt. Millions of jobs are created for Americans. Trade deficit in oil & other energy products reduced or eliminated. Export excess natural gas & coal to further improve trade deficit & possibly have a trade surplus of money flowing INTO the USA, while more jobs are created by the export business. Regulations & escrow accounts require & fund land to be returned to near-original condition after resources are removed.Money stays in US instead of funding countries that hate us. USA becomes close to energy self-sufficient and therefore not beholding to any other country. Gives time for solar, wind, & other green energies to be perfected, at which time we can export even more to further improve USA's monetary condition.
  • Anonymous on March 30 2011 said:
    To Elwyn Jones; that's the problem with people like you. As per your name you're not Russian nor French but you fucking travel a lot. You want to save the planet by burning fuel around whilst for your sake we should stay home and knit cardigans to keep us warm.
  • Anonymous on March 30 2011 said:
    Fred,Instead of dismissing CRS, perhaps you should take another look at your assumptions of what is fact. After doing a fairly exhaustive analysis of oil, nat gas, shale oil, and oil sands, I am convinced this number is LOW by probably 50%. The government estimates are traditionally low and aren't increased until development begins. For example, take the Bakken. The USGS says there are 4 billion barrels of oil there. And yet, it appears there is somewhere around 30 billion barrels of oil in place. And they are finding new strata with oil there, which will likely drive the number past 30 billion. The thing you might want to dismiss is what you currently consider as fact as told by people who don't want you to know it's there.
  • Anonymous on March 30 2011 said:
    The real problem that nobody understands is that in the 1970's Henry Kissinger went to the Middle East and negotiated our dependence on foreign oil under two conditions: all oil payments must be made using USD (which preserves its reserve currency status among the world); and, the OPEC countries must purchase UST with a portion of these monies. Now, with the Arab nations being the #4 holder of UST and the Fed already having to purchase 70% of new UST issues, do you get the point? IF we start wholescale drilling in the USA, we breach that agreement, the Arabs no longer purchase UST and dump their holdings to support their countries as oil drops in price, THEN they offer their oil in currencies other than USD. Get it?
  • Anonymous on March 30 2011 said:
    Its so easy for the INTELLIGENT PEOPLE, a dwindling commodity, in this country, to see that DEMOC RATS are only interested in maintaining POWER(=MONEY!)and they have purposefully destroyed our economy, and the middle class along with it! Talk about RUNAWAY GOVERNMENT! The QUESTION IS: HOW LONG WILL WE PUT UP WITH IT?!
  • Anonymous on March 30 2011 said:
    Almost 250 years ago the US declared independence...a little over 150 years ago the first oil well was drilled in west penn. The article maintains we have all the fuel we could ever want for the next 100 years and we need to do nothing...then what ??? Will England take us back ???
  • Anonymous on March 30 2011 said:
    First, oil is probably abiotic, not fossil. And earth keeps producing more of it. Second, the obvious objective is one world government. That can't be accomplished as long as one country has the ability to be self sufficient. So, we have it, but it is being denied us. And, like Esau with his birthright, we are willing to trade it away for anything our illustrious owners will allow us to have.Third, the world has the ability to contain multiple billions of humans, it is just our owners that want to limit humanity. They want to reduce the population to 1 billion.Fourth, global warming is such a hoax. However, pollution is not. The answer to that is in the minds of some entrepreneur somewhere, if the elites allow it to surface.And puleez, I am the former owner of a solar company, before Jimmy Carter put all of us little guys out of business......allowing only the huge corporations to remain in business...like Exxon and GE
  • Anonymous on March 30 2011 said:
    Bravo, Mr. Porter, you are an eclectic observer.
  • Anonymous on March 30 2011 said:
    Bruce: It is certain that short-chain hydrocarbons are abiotic -- since they are found in abundance on other planets and moons in the outer solar system, and even in interstellar clouds! On Earth, methane, ethane, butane, and pentane are almost certainly produced in Earth's mantle chemically. Most of it is destroyed chemically, but some of it migrates into the crust, and finds its way into strata where it mixes with biotic oil and gas.So the hydrocarbons that humans use are a mix of biotic and abiotic -- not just one or the other. But as you say, the Earth continues to crank out hydrocarbons in significant quantity. No one knows how much of them survives to reach the crust -- and economically retrievable deposits -- alas. :sad:
  • Anonymous on March 30 2011 said:
    Thanks for the compliments. Blue Angel is correct but add to that the long term is to destroy the US sovereignty. It has been totally preplanned.Big D, hey, both parties are complicit. I've worked in both. Basically the Ds are the fast track to our demise, and the Rs the slow track.Alfonso, interesting. You know they have drilled down over a mile and found oil. There have also been wells that were closed due to low production and some are now able to produce again. The Arabs have been claiming increases in oil all the while that we have been crying over "peak" oil. I actually think the Arabs are telling the truth.Gotta run and take wife to dinner!
  • Anonymous on March 31 2011 said:
    I agree with blueAngel i was aware of those dealings.. But there is a difference between peak oil and peak production( bottle neck affect) and that's why oil is really going up along with curreny devaluation acourse this is a complex issue but if anyone has any thing to add to this feel free..
  • Anonymous on April 02 2011 said:
    So, Blue Angel, are you saying that as long as we stick to our deal with the Arabs, they will only accept USD? Or do you think they might throw us under the bus the first chance they get?Kevin, what is wrong with increasing US production of oil etc while we get our house in order? Of course, it's doubtful we will make it to 2012 before the dollar collapses, is that what the problem is?It has always been unfathomable to me that environmentalists have so much power that they have prevented us from keeping our energy production in order. Maybe it's time to elect a house and senate and president that can pass laws to bypass these idiots? :-)
  • Anonymous on April 05 2011 said:
    TrendCompass visualisation for Libya vs Saudi Arabia (Opec Oil indicators): http://www.epicsyst.com/test/v2/libya-oil/
  • spepper on January 18 2012 said:
    Of course we do. Since the earliest times of exploration of the New World, just about anywhere in the Western Hemisphere has been well-known for rich deposits of oil or natural gas. This has been common knowledge for CENTURIES. Only in the past few decades when pseudo-scientists came along, to propagandize against so-called "fossil" fuels in pursuit of an agenda, did that common knowledge fall into public question-- the very term "fossil fuels" itself is now questionable-- perhaps "EARTH fuels" would be more accurate, since they were formed BEFORE biological remains even began the process of fossilization. The earth is still here, and isn't going away anytime soon-- which means the energy sources it has produced, AND IS STILL PRODUCING (meaning, NOT a biological process), is still there, and available for the benefit of all mankind, as the GOOD LORD designed it.
  • MajorMike on January 18 2012 said:
    To our abundant fossil fuels we soon will be able to add unlimited, low cost nuclear energy from Liquid Fluoride Thorium Reactors (LFTR). China and India are already hot on this development, as is the US (quietly). Beside low cost, LFTR cannot melt down, and virtually eliminates long-life radioactive waste. LFTR is the future, and will be fast upon us.
  • West Houston Geo on January 18 2012 said:
    This is one of the few articles I have read that accurately describes the true situation regarding hydrocarbon resources.
    A combination of recent technologies has changed the oil/gas industry, all unbeknownst though it be.
    Astonishingly, we are living the beginning of the Oil Age, not the end.
    And to answer your question before you ask...Yes, I am an expert.

Leave a comment




Oilprice - The No. 1 Source for Oil & Energy News