Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-23-2012, 11:34 PM
 
Location: Los Altos Hills, CA
36,628 posts, read 67,146,871 times
Reputation: 21164

Advertisements

We dont do so bad compared to other states.

Crude Oil Production by State, Number of Barrels 2009
Texas 403,797,000
Alaska 235,500,000
California 207,749,000
North Dakota 79,736,000
Louisiana 69,002,000
Oklahoma 67,018,000
New Mexico 61,146,000
Wyoming 51,333,000
Kansas 39,464,000
Colorado 28,324,000
Montana 27,692,000
Mississippi 23,232,000
Utah 22,927,000
Illinois 9,099,000
Alabama 7,189,000
Michigan 5,900,000
Ohio 5,834,000
Arkansas 5,781,000
Pennsylvania 3,541,000
Kentucky 2,609,000
Nebraska 2,239,000
West Virginia 1,864,000
Indiana 1,804,000
South Dakota 1,658,000
Florida 696,000
Nevada 455,000
New York 339,000
Tennessee 268,000
Missouri 94,000
Arizona 46,000
Virginia 14,000

Offshore Production by State, Number of Barrels 2009
Alaska 23,770,000
California 13,340,000
Louisiana 5,543,000
Texas 897,000

Crude Oil Production

Here's info from a recent article comparing nations:
Quote:
1. Russia
Russia is the single largest oil producing country in the world, with a production of about 10,124,000 barrels per day, according to statistics compiled by the U.S. Energy Information Administration. This represents just under 12% of the world supply of oil. Russia has about 60 billion barrels of proven oil reserves, or about 5% of the world total oil reserves.

2. Saudi Arabia
Saudi Arabia produces only very slightly less than Russia with approximately 10.121 million barrels per day - 12% of the total world production of oil. Saudi Arabia has the world's largest proven reserves of oil, with approximately 265 billion barrels, or about 20% of the world's proved oil reserves. This allows Saudi Arabia to increase and decrease its level of oil production depending on market conditions. Saudi Arabia was the largest oil producer as recently as 2008.

3. The United States
Many may not realize that the United States is such a large oil producer. The United States produces about 9.6 million barrels per day. This represents 11% of the world oil supply. However, the United States does not have overly large proven oil reserves. Most known reserves are already being tapped for current production needs. The United States only has about 19.1 billion barrels of proven reserves, representing only about 1 to 2% of the world's proven oil reserves. (Before jumping into this hot sector, learn how these companies make their money. See Oil And Gas Industry Primer.)

4. China
China is the world's fourth-largest oil producer, supplying about 4.27 million barrels per day, and about 5% of the world oil supply. Like the United States, China does not have extradordinarily large oil reserves, only about 20.3 billion barrels. Much like the United States, this is a very small fraction of the world's oil reserves - particularly relative to the amount of production.

5. Iran
Iran produces about 4.25 million barrels of oil per day, for about 4.9% of the world oil supply. Iran is regarded as a major player in the world oil market because it has a very large reserve of proven oil. Its proven reserves are approximately 137 billion barrels, or 10% of the world's proven oil reserves.

Top 5 Oil-Producing Countries In 2011 - Investopedia.com
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-23-2012, 11:45 PM
 
Location: The High Seas
7,373 posts, read 15,937,261 times
Reputation: 11865
The numbers seem to indicate that offshore drilling isn't worth the risk involved.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2012, 12:42 AM
 
Location: RSM
5,113 posts, read 19,684,849 times
Reputation: 1927
Those reserves are just for crude. US oil shale reserves total more than all known crude reserves on earth. Problem is that it's expensive and not great for the environment to get at it currently, but new oil sites largely fit the same mold(such as deep sea drilling)
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2012, 10:08 AM
 
12,823 posts, read 24,279,764 times
Reputation: 11039
There is actually a possibility that the US will be numero uno by mid century.

California could possibly become #2 within the US, if we'd take a second look at offshore drilling, and, higher viscosity deposits (like the ones right here in the Bay Area - yes, you read that correctly, the Bay Area).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2012, 11:35 AM
 
Location: San Luis Obispo and Santa Barbara Counties
6,390 posts, read 9,627,860 times
Reputation: 2622
Firestorm,,, burning petroleum is so last century. While I like the torque on my diesel trucks, it seems that another form of energy is a better deal.
No matter how much oil there is, can every nation in the world burn as much oil per capita as the US and not rapidly burn up the world's oil?
All that smoke will have a negative effect on us, and the planet we live on. Now, I can say that without saying global warming. Whether that is real or not, is irrelevant, we cannot put millions of tons of crap into the atmosphere without some negative result, I am sure we can all agree on that!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2012, 12:02 PM
 
25,619 posts, read 36,502,350 times
Reputation: 23291
Quote:
Originally Posted by .highnlite View Post
Firestorm,,, burning petroleum is so last century. While I like the torque on my diesel trucks, it seems that another form of energy is a better deal.
No matter how much oil there is, can every nation in the world burn as much oil per capita as the US and not rapidly burn up the world's oil?
All that smoke will have a negative effect on us, and the planet we live on. Now, I can say that without saying global warming. Whether that is real or not, is irrelevant, we cannot put millions of tons of crap into the atmosphere without some negative result, I am sure we can all agree on that!
Actually 'burning petroleum" was only in its infancy last century when you consider the technological advances and demand driving the world economy for the next 100 years. No one alive on this board today will most likely see a more productive form of energy in use for daily lives.

Your statement will actually be more appropriate most likely in 2112.

Hydrocarbons powering your world for at least the next 100 years.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2012, 12:37 PM
 
7,150 posts, read 10,837,174 times
Reputation: 3806
No, hydrocarbons will NOT power the world for the next 100 years ... regardless of availability ... the downcurve in use will arc over within the next 20 years, at best, and then the drop off will be precipitous. Like going over a cliff. Among other reasons, while the power potential in gasoline, for instance, is immense for given volume, efficiency of power use will drive innovation from here on out, making the need for massive, explosive power far less common. Hydrocarbon power will continue to drive only explosive requirements -- and most transportation will not require such wasteful fireworks.

Unfortunately, I suspect nuclear power will soar in creating the electricity appetite to power the future.

What we all really need, of course, is to stop fooling ourselves that we need hardly any external power to begin with. But that goes back to my foundational arguments for everything -- so I'll just stop. Homo sapiens are hell-bent for self-destruction and that's just the way it is.

Ted
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2012, 12:49 PM
 
2,093 posts, read 4,673,548 times
Reputation: 1121
Bakersfield of Kern County accounts for 1/10th of the oil production in the United States and providing at least 80% of California's on shore oil production supply.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2012, 01:05 PM
 
Location: Maui County, HI
4,131 posts, read 7,403,959 times
Reputation: 3391
So why are all the oil industry professional jobs in Texas? Specifically Houston, the worst part of Texas?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-24-2012, 01:07 PM
 
7,150 posts, read 10,837,174 times
Reputation: 3806
Quote:
Originally Posted by winkosmosis View Post
So why are all the oil industry professional jobs in Texas? Specifically Houston, the worst part of Texas?
Corporate offices / headquarters ... largely based on tradition ... but also favored state taxation and other perks?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Settings
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2020 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > California
View detailed profiles of:

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top