This is an old Story that needs a second look

[unapatriciated]

http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/story?id=4155639&page=1

Tiny North Dakota Town Sitting on Oil Jackpot

When you first set eyes on the frozen, wide open landscape that is western North Dakota, the word that comes to mind probably isn't "charmed." Lifelong farmer John Warburg was born there, and was never considered to be particularly lucky, until about a year ago.

Much to his surprise, Warburg is a resident of the newest and largest oil reserve in America.

"My wife called on the cell phone and she said there is a message on the machine that someone wants to dig an oil well on Grandma's ," he said. "Well, OK, right off the bat I got to thinking, OK, which neighbor is playing a joke on me?"

It was no joke. Stanley, N.D., with a population of 1,200 -- a place most people have never heard of and would never choose to visit -- is blessed with black gold. Warburg and his neighbors are sitting on what geologists believe could be well over 200 billion barrels of

oil, far more than in the highly publicized and controversial Arctic National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska.

more info here:
http://biz.yahoo.com/nytimes/080101/1194732551979.html?.v=5
http://blogs.finditt.com/Brendan%2012/Post.aspx?postID=24526

I just watched a story on this on CNN where they stated there could be more than 400 billion barrels of oil.
Tell me again why we need to open up drilling rights in ANWRA?
Could it be that it is private citizens who own the rights in North Dakota and not Big Oil?

[Cleita]

1. Thanks for posting.

I never saw this before and yes big oil has no stake in that it appears.

[unapatriciated]

2. I had not heard about this either...

CNN did a short piece on it today.
I think the Obama Campaign needs to point this out along with the many leases big oil now has that they aren't using.
This is just another mineral rights grab by big oil.

[snappyturtle]

3. When I first heard of the ND oil find I contacted my brother in Minot

and asked if the story is true. His answer, "Yes!" Older brother like answer...where have I been? HA!

[unapatriciated]

7. Minot, right next door to Whapeton.

I have family there.

[glowing]

4. Well, I would prefer to get off the black gold, but it does put a damper

in the ole' drill Alaska to bits, and make sure the fish all die in the sea...

[Extend a Hand]

5. Here is an extremely detailed analysis of likely recovery from Bakken:

http://www.theoildrum.com/node/3868

Below are the conclusions from the (long and detailed) paper.

What's next for the Bakken?

Bakken production is trending upward and should continue for some time. The October 2007 production of 75,000 BOPD equates to 27 million barrels per year, a substantial amount by most measures for the US onshore sector. This only amounts to about 0.4% of US consumption (using a base of 20,700 BOBP, based on EIA data), or 0.6% of US imports.

Drilling activity in the Bakken continues at a frenetic pace. It's difficult to predict how long the upward trend in production will continue. Over the long term, economics will play a significant role in determining how much production will be expanded.

Conclusions

1. The Bakken shale has produced about 111 million barrels of oil during the last 50+ years in Montana and North Dakota.

2. Total Bakken production is still rising, and producing at the rate of 75,000 BOPD in October 2007.

3. Because of the highly variable nature of shale reservoirs, the characteristics of the historical Bakken production, and the fact that per-well rates seem to have peaked, it seems unlikely that total Bakken production will exceed 2x to 3x current rate of 75,000 BOPD.

4. The latest boom in Bakken production is driven by the application of horizontal wells and hydraulic fracturing technology, which has added about 70 million barrels of production in 7 years. Ultimate recovery of the already-drilled wells should be at least double this volume.

5. The USGS estimates the mean volume of technically recoverable hydrocarbons to be 3,649 million barrels of oil. This is roughly 7 to 12 times the size of already known resources.

6. Based on current production and areas likely to be drilled, the USGS estimate of technically recovery resources seems optimistic.

7. The Bakken potential resource, while large by US onshore field standards, will have only a minor effect on US production or imports. Using 2006 US imports and consumption for comparison, the Bakken undiscovered resource of 3,649 million barrels of oil, if subsequently discovered and fully developed, would provide us with the equivalent of six months of oil consumption or 10 months of imports, spread over 20 or more years. In reality, the reserves developed are likely to be many times smaller than this value.

8. The October 2007 production rate of 75,000 BOPD amounts only 0.4% of US oil consumption, or 0.6% of imports.

9. Per-well Bakken production peaked in August 2005 at 116 barrels a day, and was down to 79 barrels a day in October 2007. If the Bakken production history in the 1990s can be used as a guide, the peaking of per-well production may portend a peak in total Bakken production.

Bakken is not going to save us from the consequence of peak oil (or even delay them very much).

[unapatriciated]

6. I agree it won't, but neither would drilling in Alaska...

Investing in renewable energy might save us if we start now and on a very big scale.

I was trying to point out that big oil and McCain's cry for more drilling rights was a lie.
Just another grab for more mineral rights.
They continue to suggest over and over again that Alaska holds the largest reserve and environmentalist are in some way being selfish.
A lie that could really hurt us by keeping us dependent on fossil fuel and further damaging the very environment we are trying to save.

[rucky]

8. so they loaded up the truck and they moved to Beverly...

[electron_blue]

9. nah, big oil will find a way to get their hands on most of the oil in Nodak.

ANWRA is just another pie for them.

[progressoid]

10. kicking