The report I linked to at the bottom of the post states:
“The [Baker Institute for Policy] report notes that 77 percent of world oil reserves are in the hands of national oil companies and that the major international oil companies now control less than 10 percent of the world’s oil and natural gas resource base, with the remaining part of reserves controlled by partnerships between national oil companies and international companies.”

That leaves ~13-15% (depending on how much less than 10% they mean) not attributed to NOCs or major IOCs. So, sure … not all of it. But, within the context of a global resource assessment, that amount is not huge. I’m not saying it’s not significant for those smaller producers … but within the larger context it’s not much. Furthermore, that’s global … how much of that remaining percentage is just U.S. independents?

This is from this report … if you have information from a different study that has different numbers, please link to it.

I didn’t know the USGS put out such informative and easily digestable material. Your post really put into perspective the viability of tapping that deposit.

Now, when I go to work, I can debate with everyone and really squash their hopes. lol.

I’m not talking about the USGS being equivalent to an entity of ‘what to look for when’ … that’s not up to them. I’m not talking about an assessment for company X to decided to spend/make money, i’m talking about an assessment that is important for a bigger picture perspective of energy resources as a whole. The only way to get a sense of the whole is to look at all the little pieces. I still don’t understand why you think this is either wrong or a waste of time.

Assuming a semi-decent regulatory regime, exploration companies will pay money to lease ground and tell the government what they find there as part of the exploration conditions. As an example, the sub-economic X deposit that we spent last year drilling has been sent to the relevant geologic survey, and will become publicly available information whenever we relinquish the ground. Anyone curious about sub economic resources can then dig through the data and put the numbers together themselves. While they may not be super accurate, anyone who thinks a region is with looking at in greater detail can pick up the land and do a more thorough assessment (this is currently happening for Phosphorous).

So giving the government a regulatory and archival role instead of being a state-run exploration company means that you raise revenue instead of expending it, and it means that the decision-making of what to look for when and how hard is made at the entrepreneurial level, instead of my bureaucrats far removed from the actual rocks.

I’ve been wondering what to make of the Bakken news releases, and have wondered whether unconventional oil has become economic in the way that unconventional natural gas has. It sounds like it’s economic potential is still theoretical, at this point.

Why not? You don’t think a national, or even global, assessment of resources, from a geologic point of view, from a single evaluator is useful? I think it’s very useful for forecasting (or attempting to) global energy scenarios.

Plus, you say ‘once the technology is developed’ … why would someone work towards developing technology if they were not aware of potential opportunities (as a result of the assessment of sub-economic resources)?

Who do you mean by “we”? If some enterprising inventor wan’t to form a start-up based on a new. clever, low-cost way of extracting oil, that’s great.

I might even buy 50 bucks of his 5 cent shares, on the off chance he actually does something useful.

The bigger more mature oil companies may choose to invest or not in his work using a more quantitative economic model.

I don’t see the purpose of the government quantifying sub economic resources. Once the technology is developed, then the developer can hire exploration companies to do that sort of thing. That’s like, our job.

As for state-owned companies vs private ones, developments like the Chinese interest in buying a 10% stake in BHP means that those lines are starting to blur.