Wednesday, March 15, 2006
Mexico discovers 'huge' oil field
Mexico discovers 'huge' oil field
Mr Fox's government wants Mexico to maintain its current output
Mexican President Vicente Fox has announced the discovery of a new deep-water oil field, which is believed to contain 10bn barrels of crude.
The field is in the Gulf of Mexico, and Mexico says it could be bigger than its largest oil field, Cantarell.
What ever happened to "peak oil?"
Mr Fox's government wants Mexico to maintain its current output
Mexican President Vicente Fox has announced the discovery of a new deep-water oil field, which is believed to contain 10bn barrels of crude.
The field is in the Gulf of Mexico, and Mexico says it could be bigger than its largest oil field, Cantarell.
What ever happened to "peak oil?"
Comments:
The utter cluelessness and "heads in the sand" ideas and attitudes behind this website are on display in this post. Here is an exhibit of how ideology trumps common sense.
It's nice that Mexico has discovered another big oil field. The Mexicans might have something that will supply them with enough oil over 10-15 years, but the Yankees would suck it dry in about 16-18 months at current consumption rates.
To keep up with burgeoning worldwide oil demand, 3-4 10 billion barrel oil fields must be discovered EVERY YEAR; if "projections" pan out, in 25-30 years, that rate has to increase to 7-8 new 10 billion barrel oil fields per year. And THAT has not been happening, far from it.
It's nice that Mexico has discovered another big oil field. The Mexicans might have something that will supply them with enough oil over 10-15 years, but the Yankees would suck it dry in about 16-18 months at current consumption rates.
To keep up with burgeoning worldwide oil demand, 3-4 10 billion barrel oil fields must be discovered EVERY YEAR; if "projections" pan out, in 25-30 years, that rate has to increase to 7-8 new 10 billion barrel oil fields per year. And THAT has not been happening, far from it.
Mr./Ms. Anonymous, thanks for your comment.
The reality is that so-called
"Peak Oil" doesn't matter.
Either way.
Only folks and groups that have
no confidence in free markets
and their ability to come up
with substitutes for petroleum
as motor fuel (and other fuels)
are worried about "Peak Oil."
In the meantime, PEMEX and
the Mexican state (and maybe
her citizens) have a
ready domestic market (as
well as one to the north)
for that oil.
Speaking of ideology, you might
be interested to know that I am
a _lifetime_ registered Democrat.
And a liberal one, too.
The reality is that so-called
"Peak Oil" doesn't matter.
Either way.
Only folks and groups that have
no confidence in free markets
and their ability to come up
with substitutes for petroleum
as motor fuel (and other fuels)
are worried about "Peak Oil."
In the meantime, PEMEX and
the Mexican state (and maybe
her citizens) have a
ready domestic market (as
well as one to the north)
for that oil.
Speaking of ideology, you might
be interested to know that I am
a _lifetime_ registered Democrat.
And a liberal one, too.
"Only folks and groups that have no confidence in free markets and their ability to come up with substitutes for petroleum as motor fuel (and other fuels) are worried about "Peak Oil."
You make rather broad brush statements and really have no clue about reality on (or in) the ground. Geology trumps economics, regardless of your religious beliefs.
My real lack of confidence is in Congress, which has been sold to the highest bidder, and its peculiar inability to remove the many subsidies and favors given to fossil fuels, and to ignore the externalities, failing to level the playing field for alternatives, giving them a chance to get established.
In principle, "pluggable hybrid" vehicles could replace most of the U.S. vehicle fleet and transportation fuel consumption, but it isn't going to happen without positive government action, such as giving private power companies the use of eminent domain for major new electric power lines, such as that used by the railroads in the 19th century. Without government force, this among many other tings just ain't going to happen.
You make rather broad brush statements and really have no clue about reality on (or in) the ground. Geology trumps economics, regardless of your religious beliefs.
My real lack of confidence is in Congress, which has been sold to the highest bidder, and its peculiar inability to remove the many subsidies and favors given to fossil fuels, and to ignore the externalities, failing to level the playing field for alternatives, giving them a chance to get established.
In principle, "pluggable hybrid" vehicles could replace most of the U.S. vehicle fleet and transportation fuel consumption, but it isn't going to happen without positive government action, such as giving private power companies the use of eminent domain for major new electric power lines, such as that used by the railroads in the 19th century. Without government force, this among many other tings just ain't going to happen.
Mr./Ms. Anonymous, thanks for your additional comment.
> "Only folks and groups that
> have no confidence in free
> markets and their ability to
> come up with substitutes
> for petroleum as motor fuel
> (and other fuels) are
> worried about "Peak Oil."
>
> You make rather broad
> brush statements and really
> have no clue about reality
> on (or in) the ground.
> Geology trumps
> economics, regardless of
> your religious beliefs.
Lessee - who says that energy has
to come from something pumped out
of the ground? Not me!
But for the past 100 years or so,
it's been the winner in market terms.
> My real lack of confidence is
> in Congress, which has been sold
> to the highest bidder, and
> its peculiar inability to remove
> the many subsidies and favors
> given to fossil fuels, and to
> ignore the externalities, failing
> to level the playing field
> for alternatives, giving them
> a chance to get established.
Well, I am no big fan of the U.S.
Congress either. The inability of
Congress to remove the Reagan
Administration's 1982
two-cent-cent-per gallon diversion
of highway user fees to transit
subsidies would certainly help
to level the playing field, as
you put it.
> In principle, "pluggable hybrid"
> vehicles could replace most of
> the U.S. vehicle fleet and
> transportation fuel
> consumption, but it isn't going
> to happen without
> positive government action,
> such as giving private
> power companies the use of
> eminent domain for major
> new electric power lines,
> such as that used by the
> railroads in the 19th
> century.
Hybrids motor vehicles may
be the choice of the future.
For now, they are being sold
with pretty hefty subsidies.
As for rights-of-way, at
least in some U.S. states,
eminent domain may be used to
purchase land for electric
transmission lines. And
railroads were often routed
through areas with little
existing development - and in
the case of the Baltimore and
Ohio Railroad, not only did
the state of Maryland encourage
its construction, but it also
funded purchase of much of the
right-of-way.
> Without government force,
> this among many other tings
> just ain't going to happen.
So I take it you don't agree
with the notion of "Peak Oil?"
Post a Comment
> "Only folks and groups that
> have no confidence in free
> markets and their ability to
> come up with substitutes
> for petroleum as motor fuel
> (and other fuels) are
> worried about "Peak Oil."
>
> You make rather broad
> brush statements and really
> have no clue about reality
> on (or in) the ground.
> Geology trumps
> economics, regardless of
> your religious beliefs.
Lessee - who says that energy has
to come from something pumped out
of the ground? Not me!
But for the past 100 years or so,
it's been the winner in market terms.
> My real lack of confidence is
> in Congress, which has been sold
> to the highest bidder, and
> its peculiar inability to remove
> the many subsidies and favors
> given to fossil fuels, and to
> ignore the externalities, failing
> to level the playing field
> for alternatives, giving them
> a chance to get established.
Well, I am no big fan of the U.S.
Congress either. The inability of
Congress to remove the Reagan
Administration's 1982
two-cent-cent-per gallon diversion
of highway user fees to transit
subsidies would certainly help
to level the playing field, as
you put it.
> In principle, "pluggable hybrid"
> vehicles could replace most of
> the U.S. vehicle fleet and
> transportation fuel
> consumption, but it isn't going
> to happen without
> positive government action,
> such as giving private
> power companies the use of
> eminent domain for major
> new electric power lines,
> such as that used by the
> railroads in the 19th
> century.
Hybrids motor vehicles may
be the choice of the future.
For now, they are being sold
with pretty hefty subsidies.
As for rights-of-way, at
least in some U.S. states,
eminent domain may be used to
purchase land for electric
transmission lines. And
railroads were often routed
through areas with little
existing development - and in
the case of the Baltimore and
Ohio Railroad, not only did
the state of Maryland encourage
its construction, but it also
funded purchase of much of the
right-of-way.
> Without government force,
> this among many other tings
> just ain't going to happen.
So I take it you don't agree
with the notion of "Peak Oil?"
