19 September, 2008

Offshore Drilling


I found this graphic via EcoGeek. Please allow me to state that I have no opinion on offshore drilling...most reports I've seen of that situation are extremist and emotional, and I don't want to form an extremist, emotional opinion. If any of you happen to have some balanced proof as to why offshore drilling should or should not happen, please share! I'm sick of listening to people who either have no regard for Creation or who think that preservation of Nature is more important than preservation of Mankind.

Anyway. This graphic uses stats taken from the US government (which isn't a reliable source, but that's another topic). It's the first attempt at an objective evaluation of offshore drilling that I've seen. And I find it amusing.

Not only would it take years for such a thing to reach peak production, it would only produce 200,000 barrels/day, which is about 1% of overall predicted production.

I still don't have an opinion on offshore drilling, but I think those who expect it to lower gas prices might want to look for a different solution.

5 comments:

Wes said...

This is my understanding:

The new offshore drilling program allows companies to drill at a minimum of 50 Miles offshore.

Now, this is bad... not because of the actual drilling, but because the main vein of offshore oil stays consistently 25-30 miles offshore.

If we were to drill closer to the coast, as well as drill in alaska, we could probably even out that graph much more... if not become self-sufficient in the oil department.

(to clarify my personal opinion... The age of Fossil Fuels is ending. The future is all going to be about Hydrogen-bond-combustion, Ion-propulsion, electricity and harnessing domestic energy from unlimited sources like the tides.)

Either that or the last drop of oil on the planet is going to be burned in a tank.

Clear Ambassador said...

If I were to give myself to science, fuel cell research would be the most likely target. It seems somewhat likely that advances in that area will be the solid state transistor and internal combustion engine of the future: technology that changes how everyone lives their lives.

a said...

There were some people in India that were trying to perfect an pneumatic car, but they couldn't find a tank that was strong enough to hold such a large amount of air, while being light enough for the car to move.

Then, there's the hydrogen powered car. I personally hope it never exists, because I don't like the idea of people riding around in nuclear weapons. Something about that makes me feel all giddy.

Wes said...

A... There's nothing nuclear about Hydrogen cars. It's just hydrogen bond combustion. Their only exhaust is hydrogen and water. San Francisco has Fuel Cell powered buses right now.

A little cheat sheet: anything that has "-ium" at the end is radioactive.

a said...

Sorry, I guess nuclear is the wrong word. Still, if one did have a collision, it would level everything in the surrounding area. Or that was my understanding.