• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Drilling for Oil in Antarctica

FreeMason

Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2005
Messages
70
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
How do we become independent of "foreign oil" so long as our economy is still oil-based? The sollution may be to drill for oil in Antarctica.

First Source

I am in the process of searching for more resources because this article is extremely brief and seems biased in suggesting that Antarctica has no valuable mineral resources, wanting to keep the continent free from human corruption.

However, they do state that the price to recover the oil in Antarctica would be approximately $65-$80 billion dollars a barrel. In the time this was written, that was easily a turn-down for drilling, since in 2003 the price per barrel was approximately $30.

But for those of us today in 2005, where $65 dollars a barrel were the good ol' days...drilling in Antarctica can be profitable.

(As you will see later, I'm not even sure why drilling there would be so expensive, most of it would be standard off shore drilling).

Second Source

This source argues that maybe there's quite a bit more oil than is currently estimated, due to the fact that Antarctica once was a lush forested continent. Now, it is capped by ice (which could in itself act as a trap for oil).

This I don't think is a very good assumption to make, we need exploratory wells and geologic surveys to estimate more accurately what really is there.

So how much oil is there?

Third Source

Quite a lot for US needs, not much though compared to the world in total. It is almost all (so far) estimated to be off shore...this is unreasonable, undoubtedly there is oil under the ice, but how much is unknown as we cannot map the sub-surface rocks. Drilling may be too expensive to determine what's under the ice, so we may be limited to just off-shore drilling.

Since the concerned nations (the ones sending scientists to Antarctica) have banned mineral exploitation, this treaty would need to be changed.

The treaty was enacted primarily because no one could agree on who gets what resources, but concerning the problems of oil today, I feel this can be over-come in the following manner.

Every nation in the (SCAR) gets an equal share of a new oil company. Not Halliburton, not Total Fina Elf, a new oil company.

These nations all contribute equipment, personel and expertise to the drill sites, equally.

And then sell it for equal shares of the profit.

This allows everyone there to profit together, and allows the US to buy all the oil for its own consumption.

Or at least most of the oil there.

Basically I think this is a viable idea, but currently it lacks sources, the first source is only useful for price estimates...but does not cite where the estimates came from. Either way, the first source stupidly tries to state that drilling for oil in Antarctica would cost more than oil shale mining...this makes no sense as we do plenty of off-shore drilling anyway, why not on the coasts of Antarctica?
 

wxcrazytwo

Banned
Joined
Sep 13, 2005
Messages
222
Reaction score
1
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
FreeMason said:
How do we become independent of "foreign oil" so long as our economy is still oil-based? The sollution may be to drill for oil in Antarctica.

First Source

I am in the process of searching for more resources because this article is extremely brief and seems biased in suggesting that Antarctica has no valuable mineral resources, wanting to keep the continent free from human corruption.

However, they do state that the price to recover the oil in Antarctica would be approximately $65-$80 billion dollars a barrel. In the time this was written, that was easily a turn-down for drilling, since in 2003 the price per barrel was approximately $30.

But for those of us today in 2005, where $65 dollars a barrel were the good ol' days...drilling in Antarctica can be profitable.

(As you will see later, I'm not even sure why drilling there would be so expensive, most of it would be standard off shore drilling).

Second Source

This source argues that maybe there's quite a bit more oil than is currently estimated, due to the fact that Antarctica once was a lush forested continent. Now, it is capped by ice (which could in itself act as a trap for oil).

This I don't think is a very good assumption to make, we need exploratory wells and geologic surveys to estimate more accurately what really is there.

So how much oil is there?

Third Source

Quite a lot for US needs, not much though compared to the world in total. It is almost all (so far) estimated to be off shore...this is unreasonable, undoubtedly there is oil under the ice, but how much is unknown as we cannot map the sub-surface rocks. Drilling may be too expensive to determine what's under the ice, so we may be limited to just off-shore drilling.

Since the concerned nations (the ones sending scientists to Antarctica) have banned mineral exploitation, this treaty would need to be changed.

The treaty was enacted primarily because no one could agree on who gets what resources, but concerning the problems of oil today, I feel this can be over-come in the following manner.

Every nation in the (SCAR) gets an equal share of a new oil company. Not Halliburton, not Total Fina Elf, a new oil company.

These nations all contribute equipment, personel and expertise to the drill sites, equally.

And then sell it for equal shares of the profit.

This allows everyone there to profit together, and allows the US to buy all the oil for its own consumption.

Or at least most of the oil there.

Basically I think this is a viable idea, but currently it lacks sources, the first source is only useful for price estimates...but does not cite where the estimates came from. Either way, the first source stupidly tries to state that drilling for oil in Antarctica would cost more than oil shale mining...this makes no sense as we do plenty of off-shore drilling anyway, why not on the coasts of Antarctica?

that is not the solution. The solution is more hyrbid vehicles. I mean for god sakes they are trying to get oil from rocks. How sad is that..
 

tecoyah

Back
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
9,777
Reaction score
3,417
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Or ...we could just get behind these guys....and maybe, oh....think big.

As Americans prepare to gobble down 45 million turkeys on Thursday, a factory in Carthage, Missouri, is turning the feathers and innards of the feted bird into a clean-burning fuel oil. Changing World Technologies (CWT), a New York environmental technology company that is behind the project, also has plans to turn the organic waste from chickens, cows, hogs, onions, and Parmesan cheese into light crude oil—and those are just the some of CWT's proposed ventures.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/11/1125_031125_turkeyoil.html
 

wxcrazytwo

Banned
Joined
Sep 13, 2005
Messages
222
Reaction score
1
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
tecoyah said:
Or ...we could just get behind these guys....and maybe, oh....think big.

As Americans prepare to gobble down 45 million turkeys on Thursday, a factory in Carthage, Missouri, is turning the feathers and innards of the feted bird into a clean-burning fuel oil. Changing World Technologies (CWT), a New York environmental technology company that is behind the project, also has plans to turn the organic waste from chickens, cows, hogs, onions, and Parmesan cheese into light crude oil—and those are just the some of CWT's proposed ventures.

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/11/1125_031125_turkeyoil.html
ah jeese, why not use cow manuer or other animal products. Better yet, let's go back to water and the steam engines. :roll:
 

tecoyah

Back
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
9,777
Reaction score
3,417
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
wxcrazytwo said:
ah jeese, why not use cow manuer or other animal products. Better yet, let's go back to water and the steam engines. :roll:
It would seem obvious from this statement that you did not read the information I provided....or, you have very little understanding of the Physics involved in the process noted in the article. I will break it down for you....It might help.

1)A factory has been built to take trash....and turn it into oil.
2)This factory works at appox. 85% efficiency , as it uses the byproducts of the proccess to run part of the system.
3)After the full scale model is built, there is a likely resulting drop in the cost of oil per barrel to around $10 a barrel, vs. the $70 we pay (which in many ways support middle eastern countrys that harbor extremists) My Addition

4)We have alot of trash in this country, as we are the largest consumers on the planet

My point is....this is a no Lose scenario for anyone who bothers to actually think about it. you might try that some time.
 

Technocratic_Utilitarian

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 3, 2005
Messages
670
Reaction score
0
Location
New Jersey
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
Well, what you need to do is find a cost-effective new medium for energy. The problem is that you need a transport medium that doesn't cost more energy to make than it can give. You want to have a valuable exergonic reaction when you burn it. You don't want to have to put more into it compared to what you get out of it.

Ethanol, for example, seems cheap and effective prima facie, but the problem I hear is that it costs a lot of energy in the conversion process.

We do have oil deposits (remaining), and the oil will last a while, but it's not very intelligent to wait to the last moment to invest in alternative sources of fuel and or hybrid technology. I am not sure how much of a dent the other oil deposites will have. I keep getting different calculations and stories, and I don't know who is lying.
 
Joined
Oct 2, 2005
Messages
70
Reaction score
0
Location
Tennessee
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Very Conservative
I'm all for alternative energy sources, and when the day comes that efficient alternative sources arrive on the scene I'll be the first in line. Until that day, though, we have to drill...drill...drill. The sooner we can get away from dependence on the Mid-East the better. We have to realize that oil is the mother's milk of our economy. To act as if we can conserve our way to a more prosperous economy, while simultaneously the usage of oil to fuel other economies around the world grows (i.e. China) is an act of futility.
 

FreeMason

Member
Joined
Aug 31, 2005
Messages
70
Reaction score
0
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Conservative
I cannot believe that the result of this thread is "we need alternative fuels man".

Do you have any idea how much energy the world needs?

It will take longer to build a "non-oil-based" energy system than it would to build more rigs off Antarctic shores.

The statement How sad is it we are trying to get oil from rocks.

Where do you think it comes from? Giant underground caves? Get real...all oil comes from oil saturated rocks...what is meant by oil shale mining is that we can dig under oil shales and literally set fire to the bottom of it, the heat then bakes the oil and causes it to liquify and thus seep down into the room and pillar mine we dug, which we then can extract the oil.

What needs to be done is less political sources of oil must be developed while we move from an oil economy to a non-oil economy which without a Manhattan-sized project and a lot of economic set backs...will take a long time.
 

tecoyah

Back
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
9,777
Reaction score
3,417
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I dont suppose....with all this talk of Oil, anyone actually managed to READ the article I posted....because it does kind of solve a few of these issues.

Just Sayin'
 

wxcrazytwo

Banned
Joined
Sep 13, 2005
Messages
222
Reaction score
1
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Liberal
tecoyah said:
I dont suppose....with all this talk of Oil, anyone actually managed to READ the article I posted....because it does kind of solve a few of these issues.

Just Sayin'
your article is so ridiculous that is why people aren't reading it. Even if we tried what you are saying, it would be miniscule to what is needed because American desire for bigger vehicles who care about the environment and the oil.
 

tecoyah

Back
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
9,777
Reaction score
3,417
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
wxcrazytwo said:
your article is so ridiculous that is why people aren't reading it. Even if we tried what you are saying, it would be miniscule to what is needed because American desire for bigger vehicles who care about the environment and the oil.
Actually....It is far from rediculous, as the technology is up and running with excellent results. The administration is about to push for more refineries and these funds could be put into advancing next generation technology, rather than simply adding to our dependence on someone else. It is the short sighted, lack of imagination that has allowed us to fall behind as the technology leader in this world. This country needs to realize that the next 50 years will either allow the U.S to solidify a leadership role, or force us to follow behind those who take the risks, and reap the rewards.
 

Canuck

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 2, 2005
Messages
849
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
the greenback's value is based on the world paying for oil using us currency
if that should somehow be changed the american $ would be = to a toothpick and a bubble gum.As The 8 trillion $ debt you have is underpinnned
by this

Efforts to buy oil in euros Is well under way

it would leave america with no choice but to mine the tar sands oil
even at a higher cost then america pays now for cuurent oil imports

you will more then likely see 5$ a gal gas in this dacade
 

tecoyah

Back
DP Veteran
Joined
Sep 30, 2005
Messages
9,777
Reaction score
3,417
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Canuck said:
it would leave america with no choice but to mine the tar sands oil
even at a higher cost then america pays now for cuurent oil imports
Or...perhaps...invest in new technologies that would likely lower the cost of Oil, remove waste product from overfull landfills, create economic growth as the new industry unfolds, help developing countrys become energy independent, remove some of the incentive to profit led govenment (Oil Companies), and work towards a cleaner environment.

Or we could simply sit on our withering laurels and continue to fund foreign growth thru outside oil purchace.
 
Top Bottom