What is the fine-grained topic of the following text: moving/transporting remote resources is uneconomic as long as “near” resources are available.the longer term question is – once we are having to go after the “far” resources – how will they compete in cost to alternative fuels or more efficient use?Will we ever really “run out” of fossil fuels or will they just become uneconomic compared to other alternatives?You could have a “strike” 80x bigger than Bakken – but what does that REALLY MEAN in terms of “proven reserves”? Only return the topic.
The economic feasibility of utilizing distant fossil fuel resources versus alternative fuels.