Maybe he's thinking on this

http://www.nextenergynews.com/news1/...news2.13s.html

But it seems to be a little exaggerated

http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/b/bakken.htm

As I understand there's oil under the american soil-but how much

Markus

Depending on where you look - it could be a couple of places that do - including the US.

http://www.cnbc.com/id/33550165/The_...t_Oil_Reserves

or

http://seekingalpha.com/article/6966...lking-about-it

http://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt...x322-85317.png
By this accounting, the world has about 763 billion "undiscovered" barrels of oil, of which roughly 26 percent indeed belongs to us. These figures don't include the actual reserves currently being drilled across the globe, which are quite significant. Saudi Arabia alone has about 262 billion proven barrels available.
Now, here's where the USGS figures really fall short: They ignore a massive chunk of the world's potential future oil resources. The study looks at conventional oil. That's regular old black gold, the kind that made Jed Clampett and that nutjob from There Will Be Blood rich. But there are many other kinds of oil, which get lumped into a category called "unconventional oil." That includes the billions of barrels of tar sands oil in Canada, heavy oil in Venezuela, and shale oil in North Dakota.*
So Obama's numbers almost certainly underestimate the relative size of America's potential oil supply. The Republicans may be overestimating it. Or, depending on the kinds of unconventional oil discoveries we make in the coming years, they could be massively underestimating it too. But both sides are are oversimplifying the issue. Shocking, I know, you have been lied to, yubba will find more imfo, Colorado is booming you sure here that on the news do you and Obama is doing every thing he can do to shut them down, my brother is in the natural gas game like is said more than, right here right now, drill baby drill.
____________________
crude.

yubba, recently M23 rebels, who have links to Bosco Ntaganda, have been fighting government soldiers in North Kivu in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Since you're obviously an astute observer of geopolitical events, can you give us your take on how the rebel fighting will constrain the production of cobalt ore and what this could mean for the superalloy market?

Wasn't aware of that. Thanks! :up:

can you say trillions
 

http://thecoloradoobserver.com/2012/...gao-estimates/ nice little kept secret ain't it, so you need to ask yourself why you being are being lied to by no good green no growth dummies.

We're not being lied to. From your own article:

Discussion is ongoing. Also, be advised that these are not proven reserves. The graph that I posted is of proven reserves only.

http://www.forbes.com/sites/christop...orlds-biggest/ heck we haven't gotten to the gulf yet . If we got serious about oil production we would be the riches and greatest nation on earth and Obama wants to give it away...

Exactly - it all depends on what you call "oil reserves". Proven reserves recoverable under current conditions? Proven reserves under other condtions (different regulation, tech, etc). Probably or possible reserves?

Discussion is indeed ongoing.

oopps went north mind blowing
 

http://www.reformation.org/energy-non-crisis-ch17.html man we have been had....all of us with our heads up our torpedo tubes. Drill now drill often I can't believe the people we elected to protect us done us like this all this misery for what, so some joker can get his jollies.

Yeah, just keep drilling, drill it all, use it allll up.

Then what? :O:

You're absolutely correct. Oil desposits and reserves (and all fossil fuels by proxy) are used by nations as political leverage due to the fact that they make just about everything go. As such, nations will 'stretch' their numbers and figures to achieve certain ends; which usually is the price per barrel. The nations of OPEC do it all the time. And yes, they will base it on 'future' recoverable based upon 'potential future technologies' to suit their needs. Most of the figures used to promote oil within the US rely on these future figures as well.

Your own article liked from the Colarado Observer contradicts this statement. Again, there is no deception. Discussion is ongoing in Congress as to the actual size and environmental impact of retrieving this shale. There is no coverup. To echo Dowly in another thread, repeating a falsehood will not render it true.

every last drop,,,then we cut down every tree and fish every fish out of the sea then we will be done with it, but these finds just give us some lee way so we can get greener not stupidier, Newt said he could get us down to at least 2 bucks a gallon if elected, Mitt said we could be off foreign oil in a decade last night, so if we didn't have so much oil under our feet how would those claims even be possible,?????:hmmm::hmmm::hmmm: north to Alaska the rush is on. You do know why the elites don't want to see you rich don't you ???
If we all, were rich then they wouldn't be so elite would they. right now Colorado is boomin not enough houses for workers.

Er, they're not. Not really.

Newt or Mitt (but especially Newt) wouldn't recognise the words "fungible commodity" if they were burned into Saint Rons Last Testament with a flaming bald eagle.