<A quick review of some current numbers on domestic crude oil stocks and the likeThe Oil DrumPeak Oil Update - February 2007: Production Forecasts and EIA Oil Production Numbers>
<DrumBeat: February 25, 2007DrumBeatDrumBeat: February 27, 2007>

136 comments on DrumBeat: February 26, 2007

Comments can no longer be added to this story.

CO2 on February 26, 2007 - 10:22am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

This hype and lack of basic math skills is also the reason why ANWR oil development continues to make the "addicted to oil" talking heads in Washington salivate.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
sf on February 26, 2007 - 10:42am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

ANWR is 25 times more than this discovery. That is enough to matter. It is almost inevitable that this area will be developed eventually. But it will be a lot more valuable post peak when we are all driving micro-mini cars or taking public transit.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
ET on February 26, 2007 - 11:43am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

ANWR may be or may not be 25 times more than this discovery. As I understand, the SWAGs for ANWR are just that, Scientific Wild-Ass Guesses.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
sf on February 26, 2007 - 12:14pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

There was a test well. That makes the estimate 10 gb better than a SWAG.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
elwoodelmore on February 26, 2007 - 5:47pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

one test well 10 gb ??????? roflamo

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
Jack on February 26, 2007 - 8:43pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

I also understood that there had been one test well drilled in ANWR, but that the findings were not public.

I did a fairly intensive search of the EIA, though, and could not find any reference to the test well. Instead estimates of oil resources seemed to be based on comparisions of other areas with similar geographical structures.

Does anyone have any more solid data on what we actually know about potential resources in ANWR?

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
elwoodelmore on February 27, 2007 - 7:38am Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

the 10 gb figure is apparently the mid range of usgs estimates, based on very limited information, making lots of assumptions and applying monte carlo simulation.
when i first started learning fortran* the prof had a saying "gigo" (garbage in garbage out)

* that was back in the days when programing was done on punch cards (shortly after we graduated from basic programing - the programs were saved on tickertape)

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.
ET on February 26, 2007 - 10:23pm Permalink | Subthread | Parent | Comments top

Here are a couple of links on KIC-1 'The only test well drilled in ANWR' with its results still held confidential by Chevron.

http://www.gasandoil.com/goc/company/cnn11977.htm
http://anwrnews.blogspot.com/2005/04/aint-it-kic-story-of-anwrs-only-wel...

Like I said, SWAG, unless somebody has news of a more recent, and public, exploratory effort.

0
Comments can no longer be added to this story.