So why doesnt someone build a new oil refinery ? - GoFuckYourself.com

Kard63 · 08-21-2005, 10:54 AM

Why isnt this being done ? CNN just said one hasnt been built in the US in 20 years.

jact · 08-21-2005, 10:55 AM

Why invest so much into infrastructure that won't matter when the oil runs out, huh?

Kard63 · 08-21-2005, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jact

Why invest so much into infrastructure that won't matter when the oil runs out, huh?

Apparently they are the bottleneck to the oil suply right now, not lack of supply of crude. Seems like someone new would enter the market and take a piece of the pie.

Peaches · 08-21-2005, 11:11 AM

NIMBY syndrome. No one wants an oil refinery near them.

jact · 08-21-2005, 12:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kard63

Apparently they are the bottleneck to the oil suply right now, not lack of supply of crude. Seems like someone new would enter the market and take a piece of the pie.

BS, there is not enough supply to meet demand, and it's not because enough is not being refined.. remember oil is a NON-RENEWABLE resource and everyone knew we'd run out eventually.

cambaby · 08-21-2005, 12:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jact

BS, there is not enough supply to meet demand, and it's not because enough is not being refined.. remember oil is a NON-RENEWABLE resource and everyone knew we'd run out eventually.

Where do you think oil comes from? Dead stuff. Lots of shit is dieing each day and has been, itll never run out long as we keep killing things.

JJ Gold · 08-21-2005, 12:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jact

BS, there is not enough supply to meet demand, and it's not because enough is not being refined.. remember oil is a NON-RENEWABLE resource and everyone knew we'd run out eventually.

Get a fucking clue.

cambaby · 08-21-2005, 12:38 PM

And lets not forget e=mc2 - energy equals mass times the speed of light squared - ie a dead fucking animal has enough energy in it to power a country.

BRISK · 08-21-2005, 12:40 PM

Maybe it's easier and more cost effective to simply upgrade existing refineries to increase production than to build new ones?

Doctor Dre · 08-21-2005, 12:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jact

BS, there is not enough supply to meet demand, and it's not because enough is not being refined.. remember oil is a NON-RENEWABLE resource and everyone knew we'd run out eventually.

Off course ... but right nwo they are limitting the supply so the price raise ... but it dosen't affect much on the customer end ... they still consume as much . The corp make a lot more $ in the end ... the GOV too

Doctor Dre · 08-21-2005, 12:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cambaby

Where do you think oil comes from? Dead stuff. Lots of shit is dieing each day and has been, itll never run out long as we keep killing things.

But it takes millions of years . And we dried out the whole planet in 100 years

dready · 08-21-2005, 12:45 PM

http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/

Sly · 08-21-2005, 12:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doctor Dre

But it takes millions of years . And we dried out the whole planet in 100 years

No, we have not. Even the naysayers believe there are 30-40 years worth of oil left.

To answer the question of the thread, I believe there are heavy regulations regarding oil refineries. Based on law alone, I don't think anymore can be built in California. I'll do some reading because now I'm curious...

cambaby · 08-21-2005, 12:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Doctor Dre

But it takes millions of years . And we dried out the whole planet in 100 years

But new pockets of hydrocarbons form each day from millions of years ago, the middle east was teaming with life in prehistoric times and thats why you find alot of hydrocarbons there, but with each passing decade more hydrocarbons are found in different areas of the world. Its a bell curve and I dont think we have reached the top yet. We just need to keep killing things because:
1. It will help replenish hydrocarbons for the following generations
2. Less living things means less fossil fuels used

Of course I could be wrong and probably am. I just got a woody posting this on an adult board.

Sly · 08-21-2005, 01:01 PM

http://money.cnn.com/2001/05/17/comp...ergy/index.htm

This is an older article but it touches some good points that I'm sure still hold true. The government and environmental agencies have placed a lot of regulations and red tape regarding oil refineries. It isn't profitable enough for companies to run the risk of creating more refineries. The public wants laws and restrictions that control how the energy industry works, when they start feeling the impact they get upset and blame the energy industry instead of finding out WHY things are the way they are.

JJ Gold · 08-21-2005, 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sly

http://money.cnn.com/2001/05/17/comp...ergy/index.htm

This is an older article but it touches some good points that I'm sure still hold true. The government and environmental agencies have placed a lot of regulations and red tape regarding oil refineries. It isn't profitable enough for companies to run the risk of creating more refineries. The public wants laws and restrictions that control how the energy industry works, when they start feeling the impact they get upset and blame the energy industry instead of finding out WHY things are the way they are.

Excellent post.
Finally some truth.
Thank you.

detoxed · 08-21-2005, 01:12 PM

LOL yeah not a great investment when the oil will be gone soon..... The oil companies KNOW when it will be gone, they know not to a build a brand new damn refinery, and they know whats coming

Sly · 08-21-2005, 01:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JJ Gold

Excellent post.
Finally some truth.
Thank you.

Yeh, it always amazes me how people moan and groan instead of asking a very simple one worded question... why? Open up Google, type in a few good questions and read for 20-30 minutes. You'll find a variety of sources that provide actual informitive news instead of comedy news. I have friends that use The Daily Show as their daily news source... the show is meant to make you laugh, not inform you of real news!

Sly · 08-21-2005, 01:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by detoxed

LOL yeah not a great investment when the oil will be gone soon..... The oil companies KNOW when it will be gone, they know not to a build a brand new damn refinery, and they know whats coming

If oil is going to be gone soon, why have they been creating so many new and efficient oil refineries in other countries like Saudi Arabia?

cambaby · 08-21-2005, 01:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by detoxed

LOL yeah not a great investment when the oil will be gone soon..... The oil companies KNOW when it will be gone, they know not to a build a brand new damn refinery, and they know whats coming

You are so stupid its funny.

Sly · 08-21-2005, 01:20 PM

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/ene_oil_pro

These are some interesting numbers.

We attacked Iraq because of oil, right? That was stupid. We should have attacked Iran first. They produce one and a half times the amount of oil than Iraq.

JJ Gold · 08-21-2005, 01:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sly

Yeh, it always amazes me how people moan and groan instead of asking a very simple one worded question... why? Open up Google, type in a few good questions and read for 20-30 minutes. You'll find a variety of sources that provide actual informitive news instead of comedy news. I have friends that use The Daily Show as their daily news source... the show is meant to make you laugh, not inform you of real news!

Exactly Sly. It drives me insane.

I am in SD as well and I am damn tired of the "Pain At The Pump" stories. I want to choke these idiots. They actually interviewed one woman who says she "drafts behind semi trucks" to save fuel. WTF?

detoxed · 08-21-2005, 01:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cambaby

But new pockets of hydrocarbons form each day from millions of years ago, the middle east was teaming with life in prehistoric times and thats why you find alot of hydrocarbons there, but with each passing decade more hydrocarbons are found in different areas of the world. Its a bell curve and I dont think we have reached the top yet. We just need to keep killing things because:
1. It will help replenish hydrocarbons for the following generations
2. Less living things means less fossil fuels used

Of course I could be wrong and probably am. I just got a woody posting this on an adult board.

You cant believe this can you? That enough oil will form over the next 20-30 years to sustain us another 50-100 years?

detoxed · 08-21-2005, 01:25 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sly

If oil is going to be gone soon, why have they been creating so many new and efficient oil refineries in other countries like Saudi Arabia?

Well since they have all the oil its profitable for them since their costs to acquire the oil is much lower than ours.

detoxed · 08-21-2005, 01:26 PM

Guys, you might not believe it, but oil isnt going to last more than the next 50 years without some major changes in the world. Call me stupid all you want but you are wrong.

FiReC · 08-21-2005, 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JJ Gold

They actually interviewed one woman who says she "drafts behind semi trucks" to save fuel. WTF?

sprite just shot out of my nose

dready · 08-21-2005, 01:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sly

No, we have not. Even the naysayers believe there are 30-40 years worth of oil left...

Yes, this is correct... BUT... this isn't the sweet, easy to get crude of the old days. Every year what is left is harder and costlier to get out. There is no such thing as a 'gusher' any more. Bigger and bigger pumps are needed to get what is left. Seawater has to be pumped in. All the easy oil is long gone. Canada has the largest reserves next to Saudi Arabia, but it is in the tar sands and is VERY expensive and ecologically harmful to extract. The world oil supply isn't some huge gas tank you can just open up.

Peak oil is here.

Sly · 08-21-2005, 01:33 PM

This is an interesting article: http://www.spe.org/spe/jsp/basic/0,,...109511,00.html

Check out this quote:

Quote:

At 2003 consumption levels [2], the remaining reserves represent 44.6 years of oil and 66.2 years of natural gas. Does this mean that the world will be out of fossil fuels in 50 years or so? That theory has been around since the 1970s. In fact, the figures for years of remaining reserves have remained relative constant over the past few decades as the industry has replaced consumption with newly discovered oil and gas deposits and has developed technologies to increase the amount of oil and gas that can be recovered from existing reservoirs.

Of course this source is bias, however I find it very interesting how they mention that the theory of running out of oil is over 30 years old and estimated production levels are still the same and even growing. Fascinating.

Sly · 08-21-2005, 01:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by detoxed

Guys, you might not believe it, but oil isnt going to last more than the next 50 years without some major changes in the world. Call me stupid all you want but you are wrong.

I'm not calling you stupid or wrong, just wondering what you're basing your statements off of... do we have a resident GFY geologist?

JJ Gold · 08-21-2005, 01:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dready

Yes, this is correct... BUT... this isn't the sweet, easy to get crude of the old days. Every year what is left is harder and costlier to get out. There is no such thing as a 'gusher' any more. Bigger and bigger pumps are needed to get what is left. Seawater has to be pumped in. All the easy oil is long gone. Canada has the largest reserves next to Saudi Arabia, but it is in the tar sands and is VERY expensive and ecologically harmful to extract. The world oil supply isn't some huge gas tank you can just open up.

Peak oil is here.

Is that supposed to be a joke?

cambaby · 08-21-2005, 01:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by detoxed

You cant believe this can you? That enough oil will form over the next 20-30 years to sustain us another 50-100 years?

I didnt say over the next 20-30 years I said for future generations, it takes millions of years I know this but millions of years ago things were dieing - thousands of years ago things were dieing - tens of years ago things were dieing its a big ass curve and its not gonna end 50 years from now lol.

dready · 08-21-2005, 01:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JJ Gold

Is that supposed to be a joke?

If you read the OPEC monthly reports, you would see that I am not joking. The August issue shows that production of sweet crude oil is in decline.

Also recently announced was that major oil companies (non-OPEC) have already peaked. (Source)

Call it a joke all you want. The problem is real.

cambaby · 08-21-2005, 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dready

If you read the OPEC monthly reports, you would see that I am not joking. The August issue shows that production of sweet crude oil is in decline.

Also recently announced was that major oil companies (non-OPEC) have already peaked. (Source)

Call it a joke all you want. The problem is real.

All these reports and sources assume that NO NEW EXPLORATION WILL TAKE PLACE, only existing pockets and known sources being tapped and extracted. Its liberal treefuckers that stop new exploration in obvious places.

JJ Gold · 08-21-2005, 01:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dready

If you read the OPEC monthly reports, you would see that I am not joking. The August issue shows that production of sweet crude oil is in decline.

Also recently announced was that major oil companies (non-OPEC) have already peaked. (Source)

Call it a joke all you want. The problem is real.

When you use terms like "gushers" doesn't help your cause.

Technology is revolutionizing exploration (as it has every other industry) and there will actually be more oil produced in the future due to increased exploration.

The "oil sands" in Canada are a joke.

detoxed · 08-21-2005, 02:05 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cambaby

I didnt say over the next 20-30 years I said for future generations, it takes millions of years I know this but millions of years ago things were dieing - thousands of years ago things were dieing - tens of years ago things were dieing its a big ass curve and its not gonna end 50 years from now lol.

ok, but if oil runs out now it will still be forming, but what are they going to do, put up the equipment for a few thousand years until there is a little more oil?

dready · 08-21-2005, 02:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cambaby

All these reports and sources assume that NO NEW EXPLORATION WILL TAKE PLACE, only existing pockets and known sources being tapped and extracted. Its liberal treefuckers that stop new exploration in obvious places.

-------------------------
LONDON (Reuters) - Growth in the world?s oil and gas reserves stalled last year, a report from oil giant BP showed on Tuesday, bucking a trend that has historically seen new discoveries more than match production.
-------------------------

The world faces a global oil supply shortage after 2007, which would threaten economic growth, according to new research by the Oil Depletion Analysis Centre (Odac) which says that not enough major new fields will come on stream to offset declines .

?Our latest research confirms solidly our view that we cannot see any reasonable circumstances under which new supplies from expected mega oil projects could possibly meet world demand by 2008,? said a spokesman for London-based Odac.
-------------------------

dready · 08-21-2005, 02:14 PM

LONDON (Reuters) - Oil major Royal Dutch/Shell replaced less than half the oil it pumped last year with new finds, according to revised reserves figures published Thursday.

Shell said its proved reserves stood at 11.9 billion barrels of oil equivalent (boe) at the end of 2004, equal to less than nine years' production at average 2004 rates, excluding the Athabasca oil sands reserves, which it put at 0.6 billion boe.

While the figures were broadly in line with previous guidance, they will cement many investors' worries that Shell has lost its knack of finding oil, following a reserves over-booking scandal last year that led the company to downgrade around a quarter of its oil and gas reserves.

"The Reserve Replacement Ratio (RRR), excluding the impact of divestments and year-end pricing and including associates, was 49 percent," Shell said after it filed a report with the U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission (SEC). "Including the impact of divestments and year-end pricing, the RRR was 19 percent."

Shell, the world's third-largest oil group by market capitalization, added that it continued to target at least a 100 percent replacement of its oil reserves from 2004 to 2008.

Most of the large international oil firms are finding it increasingly hard to make new oil finds big enough to meet their goals to replace and increase production, threatening their long-term health.

detoxed · 08-21-2005, 02:18 PM

Sly.. I learned a long time ago that articles and links like that dont mean shit. The .org at the end doesnt help its credibility much. After all the goverment sponsored research and articles I've read that are so 100% full of shit I dont see how anyone can take that seriously. Bottom line is oil is running out, and we all know the people with money control the information and the government. Weed is illegal because drug companies didnt want competition from a plant that can be grown in your backyard. People say oil is OK because the oil companies dont want to lose money to much cheaper effective means of energy. I read an "article" by a research at a University in California that has successfully turned Tahoes and Suburbans, etc into 250mpg vehicles using different forms or fuel or battery systems. It cost him $250,000 to make 1, but he estimated that in mass production the motor companies could do this for an average of $6,000 per car, but its not gonna happen, the oil companies would NEVER let the car companies do this, the car companies do the government required minimum for shitty 30mpg cars and thats it. They make these electric cars, etc UGLY AS FUCK, so NO ONE WANTS TO DRIVE THEM. That is NOT an accident.

KRL · 08-21-2005, 02:22 PM

The risks were too high prior to this huge increase.

detoxed · 08-21-2005, 02:24 PM

We have the technology, but the oil companies will NOT let us use them until there is no more oil for them to sell us.

Bush is in the White House which proves exactly how much power there is in oil.

cambaby · 08-21-2005, 02:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by detoxed

ok, but if oil runs out now it will still be forming, but what are they going to do, put up the equipment for a few thousand years until there is a little more oil?

LOL you act like there is not a constant CURVE of hydrocarbon supply, it doesnt just STOP lol it is a constant - albiet maybe LESS but a constant nonetheless.

detoxed · 08-21-2005, 02:26 PM

I think the world will be a lot more interesting in 2015-2020

pornguy · 08-21-2005, 02:26 PM

The sad thing is, that plenty of ways have been developed to bring down the costs of transportation, and they are not being used. And they wont be for as long as the Governments have their hands in the pie.

cambaby · 08-21-2005, 02:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dready

?Our latest research confirms solidly our view that we cannot see any reasonable circumstances under which new supplies from expected mega oil projects could possibly meet world demand by 2008,? said a spokesman for London-based Odac.
-------------------------

ABOUT ODAC
The Oil Depletion Analysis Centre (ODAC) is an independent, UK-registered educational charity working to raise international public awareness and promote better understanding of the world's oil-depletion problem.

Yeah right real unbiased lol.

yys · 08-21-2005, 02:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sly

This is an interesting article: http://www.spe.org/spe/jsp/basic/0,,...109511,00.html

Check out this quote:

Of course this source is bias, however I find it very interesting how they mention that the theory of running out of oil is over 30 years old and estimated production levels are still the same and even growing. Fascinating.

The running out of oil theory is actually over 100 years old. The world was supposed to run out of oil by the 1920's.
The world is approaching peak oil production levels using today's technology and proven reserve levels. We are currently consuming 1 billion barrels of oil every 12 days and we certainly aren't discovering 1 billion new barrels every 12 days.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JJ Gold

The "oil sands" in Canada are a joke.

The oil sands are no joke but keep telling yourself that. It cost $6-$12 a barrel to extract with current technology. The refined product is of a lower quality so it is usually sold at a discount of $12. Any oil price over $25 makes extracting the oil from the sands profitable. I think oil will be over $25 for the foreseeable future don't you? Also remember that the viable reserves they talk about are only the oil that can be extracted with the current technology and that only represents about 10% of the total oil in the sands.

Sly · 08-21-2005, 02:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pornguy

The sad thing is, that plenty of ways have been developed to bring down the costs of transportation, and they are not being used. And they wont be for as long as the Governments have their hands in the pie.

Its more complicated than that.

The cost of alternative energy sources is still pretty high. The demand is so low for the time being that it just isn't worth doing. Cars can run on methanol but right now its more expensive than gas due to development costs and lack of demand.

Alternative energy sources will start coming more and more into play. The government does have many grants available to help people setup alternative energy sources. For example, the State of California will pay up to half the cost of setting your home up with wind powered energy. It costs around $40k to setup and the government will pay $20k. With that grant, a typical home will make back their $20k investment within 10 years. If I had land, I would totally take advantage of that.

There are programs available. You just have to look.

theking · 08-21-2005, 02:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kard63

Apparently they are the bottleneck to the oil suply right now, not lack of supply of crude. Seems like someone new would enter the market and take a piece of the pie.

The cost of building a new refinery is hugh and additional costs and delays in building is caused by the EPA and OSHA requirements.

The Saudi's offered to build two refineries in the US but was denied the right to do so.

dready · 08-21-2005, 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cambaby

ABOUT ODAC
The Oil Depletion Analysis Centre (ODAC) is an independent, UK-registered educational charity working to raise international public awareness and promote better understanding of the world's oil-depletion problem.

Yeah right real unbiased lol.

Fine, ignore that quote... what about the 2 from BP and Shell? You think they like telling people they might be out of business soon? Exploration is becomming more and more costly. Some companies are spending more money on finding the oil than they get selling it. The Capsian Sea in the 90s was supposed to be the next big thing that would save us all... it never panned out. It's about the same as the North Sea reserves which is like 4% of world reserves. Yet this is the biggest discovery in years.

How about this article in the New York Times:
Top oil groups fail to recoup exploration costs

Quote:

The world's biggest oil companies are failing to get value for money when they explore for new reserves, according to research by Wood Mackenzie, the energy consultant.

The report shows the commercial value of oil and gas discovered over the past three years by the 10 largest listed energy groups is running well below the amount they have spent on exploration.

NoCarrier · 08-21-2005, 02:59 PM

Wow! I didn't know there were so many "OIL" experts on this board. Guys, you have the wrong job!

jact · 08-21-2005, 03:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dready

Fine, ignore that quote... what about the 2 from BP and Shell? You think they like telling people they might be out of business soon? Exploration is becomming more and more costly. Some companies are spending more money on finding the oil than they get selling it. The Capsian Sea in the 90s was supposed to be the next big thing that would save us all... it never panned out. It's about the same as the North Sea reserves which is like 4% of world reserves. Yet this is the biggest discovery in years.

How about this article in the New York Times:
Top oil groups fail to recoup exploration costs

Stop trying to make sense to sheep who think oil is an unlimited resource. Too funny.

08-21-2005, 10:54 AM	#1
Kard63 Confirmed User Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: 237 619 975 Posts: 8,944	So why doesnt someone build a new oil refinery ? Why isnt this being done ? CNN just said one hasnt been built in the US in 20 years. __________________

08-21-2005, 10:55 AM	#2
jact Confirmed User Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Oakville, Canada Posts: 9,134	Why invest so much into infrastructure that won't matter when the oil runs out, huh? __________________ Free agent

08-21-2005, 12:40 PM	#9
BRISK Too lazy to set a custom title Join Date: Feb 2003 Posts: 12,240	Maybe it's easier and more cost effective to simply upgrade existing refineries to increase production than to build new ones? __________________ I post on GFY so that when people ask me what I do, I can tell them that I work with the mentally retarded.

08-21-2005, 12:45 PM	#12
dready Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Toronto, ON Posts: 5,247	http://www.lifeaftertheoilcrash.net/ __________________ ICQ: 91139591

08-21-2005, 01:01 PM	#15
Sly Let's do some business! Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 31,329	http://money.cnn.com/2001/05/17/comp...ergy/index.htm This is an older article but it touches some good points that I'm sure still hold true. The government and environmental agencies have placed a lot of regulations and red tape regarding oil refineries. It isn't profitable enough for companies to run the risk of creating more refineries. The public wants laws and restrictions that control how the energy industry works, when they start feeling the impact they get upset and blame the energy industry instead of finding out WHY things are the way they are. __________________ Vacares - Web Hosting, Domains, O365, Security & More - Paxum and BTC Accepted Windows VPS now available Great for TSS, Nifty Stats, remote work, virtual assistants, etc. Click here for more details.

08-21-2005, 11:11 AM	#4
Peaches Old broad Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Away Posts: 13,933	NIMBY syndrome. No one wants an oil refinery near them.

08-21-2005, 12:38 PM	#8
cambaby So Fucking Banned Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: CR Posts: 3,141	And lets not forget e=mc2 - energy equals mass times the speed of light squared - ie a dead fucking animal has enough energy in it to power a country.

08-21-2005, 01:12 PM	#17
detoxed vip member Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 17,798	LOL yeah not a great investment when the oil will be gone soon..... The oil companies KNOW when it will be gone, they know not to a build a brand new damn refinery, and they know whats coming

08-21-2005, 01:20 PM	#21
Sly Let's do some business! Industry Role: Join Date: Sep 2004 Location: Austin, TX Posts: 31,329	http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/ene_oil_pro These are some interesting numbers. We attacked Iraq because of oil, right? That was stupid. We should have attacked Iran first. They produce one and a half times the amount of oil than Iraq. __________________ Vacares - Web Hosting, Domains, O365, Security & More - Paxum and BTC Accepted Windows VPS now available Great for TSS, Nifty Stats, remote work, virtual assistants, etc. Click here for more details.

08-21-2005, 01:26 PM	#25
detoxed vip member Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 17,798	Guys, you might not believe it, but oil isnt going to last more than the next 50 years without some major changes in the world. Call me stupid all you want but you are wrong.

08-21-2005, 02:14 PM	#37
dready Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Toronto, ON Posts: 5,247	LONDON (Reuters) - Oil major Royal Dutch/Shell replaced less than half the oil it pumped last year with new finds, according to revised reserves figures published Thursday. Shell said its proved reserves stood at 11.9 billion barrels of oil equivalent (boe) at the end of 2004, equal to less than nine years' production at average 2004 rates, excluding the Athabasca oil sands reserves, which it put at 0.6 billion boe. While the figures were broadly in line with previous guidance, they will cement many investors' worries that Shell has lost its knack of finding oil, following a reserves over-booking scandal last year that led the company to downgrade around a quarter of its oil and gas reserves. "The Reserve Replacement Ratio (RRR), excluding the impact of divestments and year-end pricing and including associates, was 49 percent," Shell said after it filed a report with the U.S. Securities & Exchange Commission (SEC). "Including the impact of divestments and year-end pricing, the RRR was 19 percent." Shell, the world's third-largest oil group by market capitalization, added that it continued to target at least a 100 percent replacement of its oil reserves from 2004 to 2008. Most of the large international oil firms are finding it increasingly hard to make new oil finds big enough to meet their goals to replace and increase production, threatening their long-term health. __________________ ICQ: 91139591

08-21-2005, 02:18 PM	#38
detoxed vip member Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 17,798	Sly.. I learned a long time ago that articles and links like that dont mean shit. The .org at the end doesnt help its credibility much. After all the goverment sponsored research and articles I've read that are so 100% full of shit I dont see how anyone can take that seriously. Bottom line is oil is running out, and we all know the people with money control the information and the government. Weed is illegal because drug companies didnt want competition from a plant that can be grown in your backyard. People say oil is OK because the oil companies dont want to lose money to much cheaper effective means of energy. I read an "article" by a research at a University in California that has successfully turned Tahoes and Suburbans, etc into 250mpg vehicles using different forms or fuel or battery systems. It cost him $250,000 to make 1, but he estimated that in mass production the motor companies could do this for an average of $6,000 per car, but its not gonna happen, the oil companies would NEVER let the car companies do this, the car companies do the government required minimum for shitty 30mpg cars and thats it. They make these electric cars, etc UGLY AS FUCK, so NO ONE WANTS TO DRIVE THEM. That is NOT an accident.

08-21-2005, 02:22 PM	#39
KRL Entrepreneur Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: USA Posts: 31,429	The risks were too high prior to this huge increase. __________________ If you would like to develop your domains, you can lease inexpensive foreign labor from the leaders in the field at iWebmasters.com TO LOWER YOUR COSTS AND INCREASE YOUR PRODUCTION! * * * * * * * * * * * * Domains Adult News KRL's Newsletter Biz Tips Just Listed Domains

08-21-2005, 02:24 PM	#40
detoxed vip member Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 17,798	We have the technology, but the oil companies will NOT let us use them until there is no more oil for them to sell us. Bush is in the White House which proves exactly how much power there is in oil.

08-21-2005, 02:26 PM	#42
detoxed vip member Join Date: Jan 2003 Posts: 17,798	I think the world will be a lot more interesting in 2015-2020

08-21-2005, 02:26 PM	#43
pornguy Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Homeless Posts: 62,911	The sad thing is, that plenty of ways have been developed to bring down the costs of transportation, and they are not being used. And they wont be for as long as the Governments have their hands in the pie. __________________ PornGuy skype me pornguy_epic AmateurDough The Hottes Shemales online! TChicks.com \| Angeles Cid \| Mariana Cordoba \| MAILERS WELCOME!

08-21-2005, 02:59 PM	#49
NoCarrier We need more free porn Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Montreal Posts: 16,356	Wow! I didn't know there were so many "OIL" experts on this board. Guys, you have the wrong job! __________________