Notices
Money Talk Your hard-earned money

Peak Oil: Mexico

Old 09-21-2009, 12:19 PM
  #11  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
atpcliff's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2007
Position: Capt
Posts: 3,215
Default

Hi!

Peak Oil:
The US is past peak.
The UK is past peak.
Norway is past peak.
Sweden is past peak.
Finland is past peak.
Germany is past peak.
France is past peak.
Italy is past peak.
Spain is past peak.
Japan is past peak.
China is past peak.
Korea is past peak.
etc., etc.

So, you are saying that this same thing won't occur in ALL countries of the world? That the composition of the earth under some countries is radically different than others?

For Peak Oil not to be true, there must be constant oil production within the earth. And, how can that be? The earth is finite, so the amount of materials in the earth is finite, so it cannot hold an unlimited amount of oil, or anything else.

There is a LIMIT!

That is why using solar power more directly (solar, wind water, etc.), is smart. The sun is providing us all the clean power we need, if we learn how to utilize it correctly. And, when the sun runs out of energy, it won't matter to us here on earth anymore.

cliff
NBO
atpcliff is offline  
Old 09-21-2009, 12:48 PM
  #12  
With The Resistance
 
jungle's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2006
Position: Burning the Agitprop of the Apparat
Posts: 6,191
Default

CAMBRIDGE, Mass., November 14, 2006 – In contrast to a widely discussed theory that world oil production will soon reach a peak and go into sharp decline, a new analysis of the subject by Cambridge Energy Research Associates (CERA) finds that the remaining global oil resource base is actually 3.74 trillion barrels -- three times as large as the 1.2 trillion barrels estimated by the theory’s proponents -- and that the “peak oil” argument is based on faulty analysis which could, if accepted, distort critical policy and investment decisions and cloud the debate over the energy future.

“The global resource base of conventional and unconventional oils, including historical production of 1.08 trillion barrels and yet-to-be-produced resources, is 4.82 trillion barrels and likely to grow,” CERA Director of Oil Industry Activity Peter M. Jackson writes in Why the Peak Oil Theory Falls Down: Myths, Legends, and the Future of Oil Resources. The CERA projection is based on the firm’s analysis of fields currently in production and those yet-to-be produced or discovered.


“The ‘peak oil’ theory causes confusion and can lead to inappropriate actions and turn attention away from the real issues,” Jackson observes. “Oil is too critical to the global economy to allow fear to replace careful analysis about the very real challenges with delivering liquid fuels to meet the needs of growing economies. This is a very important debate, and as such it deserves a rational and measured discourse.”
“This is the fifth time that the world is said to be running out of oil,” says CERA Chairman Daniel Yergin. “Each time -- whether it was the ‘gasoline famine’ at the end of WWI or the ‘permanent shortage’ of the 1970s -- technology and the opening of new frontier areas has banished the specter of decline. There’s no reason to think that technology is finished this time.”

The report emphasizes the importance of focusing on the critical issues. “It is not helpful to couch the debate in terms of a superficial analysis of reservoir constraints. It will be aboveground factors such as geopolitics, conflict, economics and technology that will dictate the outcome.” The report also points to such aboveground questions as timing and openness to investment, infrastructure development, and the impact of technological change on demand for oil.



Undulating Plateau

The new report describes CERA’s liquids supply outlook as “not a view of endless abundance.” However, based on a range of potential scenarios and field-by-field analysis, CERA finds that not only will world oil production not peak before 2030, but that the idea of a peak is itself “a dramatic but highly questionable image.”

Global production will eventually follow an “undulating plateau” for one or more decades before declining slowly. The global production profile will not be a simple logistic or bell curve postulated by geologist M. King Hubbert, but it will be asymmetrical – with the slope of decline more gradual and not mirroring the rapid rate of increase -- and strongly skewed past the geometric peak. It will be an undulating plateau that may well last for decades.

During the plateau period in later decades, according to the CERA analysis, demand growth will likely no longer be largely met by growth in available, commercially exploitable natural oil supplies. Non-traditional or unconventional liquid fuels such as production from heavy oil sands, gas-related liquids (condensate and natural gas liquids), gas-to-liquids (GTL), and coal-to-liquids (CTL) will need to fill the gap.

Critical Issue

CERA argues that understanding the difference between a plateau and a peak followed by a precipitous decline, as well as the timing of events, is critical to the global energy future. “Corporations, governments, and other groups, including nongovernmental organizations, need to have a coherent description of how and when the undulating plateau will evolve so that rational policy and investment choices can be made,” according to the report.

“It is likely that the situation will unfold in slow motion and that there are a number of decades to prepare for the start of the undulating plateau. This means that there is time to consider the best way to develop viable energy alternatives that would eventually provide the bulk of our transport energy needs and ensure that there is a useable production stream of conventional crude for some time to come,” CERA concludes.
jungle is offline  
Old 09-21-2009, 01:22 PM
  #13  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Position: B767
Posts: 1,899
Default

Originally Posted by atpcliff View Post
Hi!

Peak Oil:
The US is past peak.
The UK is past peak.
Norway is past peak.
Sweden is past peak.
Finland is past peak.
Germany is past peak.
France is past peak.
Italy is past peak.
Spain is past peak.
Japan is past peak.
China is past peak.
Korea is past peak.
etc., etc.

So, you are saying that this same thing won't occur in ALL countries of the world? That the composition of the earth under some countries is radically different than others?

For Peak Oil not to be true, there must be constant oil production within the earth. And, how can that be? The earth is finite, so the amount of materials in the earth is finite, so it cannot hold an unlimited amount of oil, or anything else.

There is a LIMIT!

That is why using solar power more directly (solar, wind water, etc.), is smart. The sun is providing us all the clean power we need, if we learn how to utilize it correctly. And, when the sun runs out of energy, it won't matter to us here on earth anymore.

cliff
NBO
Cliff, you are really showing your true colors now. You seem to be one of those those that wish for calamity and disaster, and are disappointed when it doesn't happen on schedule. You're always harping about peak oil, global warming, etc. Just like that JetFlyer guy, who also was in a tail spin about bird flu a couple of years ago. I've seen it before here in FL during hurricane season, when some people secretly wanted the hurricanes to become strong and violent, and to make a beeline to their community. We call them "wishcasters". I never have figured out what makes those guys tick, it is a strange thing to observe.

Anyway, your answer to the stated "problem" you present is solar. That sounds nice, but it really is naive, and it shows that you haven't done much research on the subject and most likely do not posses a scientific background. If you did, you'd have a better grasp on the base energy needs required to replace fossil fuels. Essentially there only two possibilities: Coal (which is a fossil fuel anyway), and nuclear. Sorry bud, those are the only options for our BASE power needs until dilithium crystals hit the market.

Last edited by wrxpilot; 09-21-2009 at 01:41 PM.
wrxpilot is offline  
Old 09-22-2009, 04:46 AM
  #14  
Gets Weekends Off
 
KC10 FATboy's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jun 2007
Position: Legacy FO
Posts: 4,094
Default

Actually a better word is doomsayer.
KC10 FATboy is offline  
Old 09-22-2009, 09:30 AM
  #15  
Gets Weekends Off
 
Joined APC: Sep 2008
Position: B767
Posts: 1,899
Default

Originally Posted by KC10 FATboy View Post
Actually a better word is doomsayer.
Agreed. Either way, I think it would be a sad way to view life.
wrxpilot is offline  
Old 09-22-2009, 12:38 PM
  #16  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
atpcliff's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2007
Position: Capt
Posts: 3,215
Default

Hi!

The Oil Drum | Peak Oil Update - July 2009: Production Forecasts and EIA Oil Production Numbers

Peak oil was Jul, 2008. Can we ever produce more? Maybe. A little bit more.

cliff
NBO

And now...Peak Coal:
http://dsc.discovery.com/news/2009/0...al-energy.html
atpcliff is offline  
Old 09-22-2009, 04:19 PM
  #17  
Libertarian Resistance
 
Winged Wheeler's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Feb 2007
Position: 757 FO
Posts: 1,057
Default More on peak oil

From our friends at CATO:

http://www.cato.org/pubs/handbook/hb111/hb111-43.pdf

Peak Oil
A growing number of market analysts, industry investors, and policy
advocates are convinced that conventional crude oil is becoming more
scarce, and thus more expensive, as the world consumes ever-larger quantities
of something for which there is only a fixed supply. A cottage industry
has thus arisen around the proposition that global oil production will soon
peak and then begin a slow but rapidly accelerating decline. This approach
of ‘‘peak oil,’’ according to some, explains the growing scarcity—and
thus the rising price—of low-cost crude oil.


Although there is mathematical certainty about the fact that at some
point conventional crude oil production will peak, there is little reason to
think that day is necessarily on the economic horizon given production
data over the past several decades. If oil were growing scarcer, for instance,
we should see some evidence of that in rising crude oil prices. But a
rigorous analysis of crude oil prices from the first quarter of 1970 through
the first quarter of 2008 by economist James Hamilton finds no statistically
significant scarcity signal at all. On the contrary, his analysis finds that
‘‘the real price of oil seems to follow a random walk without drift.’’
Hence, we cannot say for certain what most people seem to believe—
that oil prices have been increasing over time.


Furthermore, Hamilton’s analysis suggests that the best predictor of
future price (that is, future scarcity) is present price, but the variance is
large: 15.28 percent per quarter. That’s because small changes in the
supply or demand for crude oil have major price impacts in the short run,
and any number of minor global events affect the supply or demand for
crude oil. Table 43.1, for instance, demonstrates how a forecast for future
oil prices made in the first quarter of 2008 grows over time given the
observed instability of oil prices.


A conclusion that one can draw from the table is that even if prices
rose dramatically in the near future, one could not say with confidence
whether that price rise reflected underlying physical scarcities caused by
long-term oil field depletions or any number of other short-term supply
or demand phenomena commonly seen in the oil industry.
Although peak oilers are correct that new oil discoveries over the last
several decades have been smaller and less frequent than in the past, how
much crude oil is yet to be discovered is by definition unknown and
unknowable. Hence, predictions about ‘‘peak oil’’ in the near term may
be correct—or not. We simply don’t know enough to say.
There are, however, four reasons for optimism. Together, they suggest
that expansion of supply is just as likely—if not likelier—than contraction
in the near to mid-term future.


First, high oil prices induce more exploration and more risk taking by
oil companies. Economist Klaus Mohn observes: ‘‘When the oil price
increases, oil companies take on more exploration risk.
Consequently, discovery rates will fall whereas the average discovery size will increase.’’

His examination of exploration and development data off the Norwegian
coast suggests that for every 10 percent increase in oil prices, reserves
increase by 8.9 percent in the long run.


Second, high prices may likewise induce more production from OPEC
countries as well. Claims about depleting reserves may be correct, but
there may be many more fields to come.
The Persian Gulf is one of the least explored areas of the world as far
as oil and natural gas are concerned. Only about 2,000 exploratory wells
have been drilled in the entire Persian Gulf since its emergence as an oilproducing
region. The United States, by comparison, has seen more than
1 million such wells. Even today, more than 70 percent of oil exploration
activity is concentrated in North America (which holds less than 3 percent
of the world’s oil reserves), whereas only 3 percent of that activity is
occurring in the Middle East (which holds about 70 percent of the world’s
oil reserves). Moreover, given that most of the exploration in the Persian
Gulf occurred decades ago before nationalization of the oil industry, the
dramatic advances in exploration technology and know-how have not for
the most part been applied to the most promising geological formations
in the world. More than a few industry observers argue that, yes, we will
almost certainly discover a new Saudi Arabia sometime in the future—
but it will likely be in Saudi Arabia.
Will high prices induce substantial new investments in oil exploration
in the OPEC countries and Russia, which likewise sits atop very promising
but scarcely explored geological formations? Only time will tell, but it is
hard to imagine that profit-maximizing oil states would forgo economically
promising investments indefinitely, particularly when the oil and gas industry
is the primary source of state revenue and prices are on the rise. If new
oil is not forthcoming, it will likely be due to political—not geological—
constraints.
The upshot is that the observation that major new oil discoveries have
declined over the past several decades in both OPEC and non-OPEC
countries is problematic because oil prices have likewise been falling over
most of that period. Trends in discoveries may historically have more to
do with price and politics than with geological scarcity.


Third, major new oil field discoveries are not necessary for major
increases in supply. Increasing average field recovery rates from 35 percent
to 40 percent, for instance, would increase supply by 300 billion to 600
billion barrels, which is akin to adding a new Saudi Arabia or two to the market.
Given that field recovery rates have steadily improved over time—

they averaged only 22 percent as recently as 1980—there is reason to
hope that high prices will induce new investment in—and corresponding
improvement in—low-cost extraction practices and technology.
Unconventional sources of crude oil are another source of potential
new supply. The International Energy Agency believes that 6 trillion
barrels of crude oil reside in heavy oil and bitumen stocks (primarily tar
sands like those in Alberta, heavy oil deposits like those in Venezuela,
and oil shale in mineral deposits such as those found in the Rocky Mountain
West), of which 2 trillion may be ultimately recoverable. Given that
conventional oil reserves worldwide total 1.3 trillion barrels, this suggests
that, should conventional crude oil prices rise high enough because of
depletion—or alternatively, should extraction costs of unconventional
crude oil decline substantially because of technological advance—massive
new sources of unconventional oil supply could enter the market.
Beyond unconventional crude oil are even larger possibilities for synthetic
oil production from gas-to-liquid technologies, coal-to-liquid technologies,
agricultural oils, and methane hydrates found on the seabed and
in permafrost Arctic regions. Hydrocarbons for oil production can be
harnessed from many sources, and conventional crude oil fields are but
one source of many.


Fourth, investments in new field production have followed the oil price
spiral and new supply will soon be entering the market. A recent tally in
the Oil & Gas Journal of publicly known oil development projects under
way found that 28 million barrels a day of new supply is coming from
47 countries over the next two decades, a sum that represents approximately
one-third of existing daily global production. Although production declines
from existing fields will certainly offset that new supply to some degree,
the encouraging fact remains that new supplies at the margin are still
potentially quite robust.
Winged Wheeler is offline  
Old 09-23-2009, 06:28 AM
  #18  
Gets Weekends Off
Thread Starter
 
atpcliff's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Mar 2007
Position: Capt
Posts: 3,215
Default

Hi!

A couple of points:
In the face of rising demand, and rising prices, how come 2007 production was below 2006?

Point One, above:
"Although there is mathematical certainty about the fact that at some
point conventional crude oil production will peak
...
for every 10 percent increase in oil prices, reserves
increase by 8.9 percent in the long run."
He just contradicted himself. He said that the supply of oil is finite, and then he said inthe long run, as prices go up, reserves will go up. Can NOT happen if the supply is finite.

Point 2:
"...high prices may likewise induce more production..."
This, again, assumes the supply is infinte. In the long run, oil is finite. In the "Short Run" the above is true....the question is, what is short-term? In other words, how long 'til Peak Oil, because once oil has peaked, by definition, every year's production of oil following the peak will be less, which does not work with increasing demand. The author, basically, is saying in Point 2, that Peak Oil is DECADES away. The PO people are saying that it will be between 2008, and 2010/2012.

Point 3:
The main source of non-liquid oil is shale, and today, we are burning tommorrow's supply of Natural Gas to make the oil. Not very nice.

Point 4:
New supply in the next 2 Decades. And if Oil Peaks between 2008 and 2012, it will not be nice to wait 20 years for more oil.

Basically, CATO is making an economic argument about a physical resource. Oil doesn't care how much money you have. It is oil, and when you burn it, it is gone.

CATO's economic-type argument does apply to sun power (solar, wind water, etc.). Sun power is, basically, unlimited, and that is what we should be focusing our time, energy, and resources on developing.

cliff
NBO
atpcliff is offline  
Old 09-24-2009, 07:32 AM
  #19  
Self Employed.
 
SkyHigh's Avatar
 
Joined APC: May 2005
Position: Corporate Pilot
Posts: 7,119
Default Demand

I personally was shocked by how flexible demand was in regards to fuel. If we are past peak then all we have to do as a country is to be willing to pay a few cents more per gallon then China or India and we can continue to have the oil all to ourselves.

Other nations do not seem to have the ability to absorb increasing fuel prices as much as we do.

Our future probably lies somewhere between peak oil destruction and a continuance of our global gluttonous ways. Fuel prices will most likely climb over the years inspiring advances in efficiency and alternative forms of energy. The rich will continue to consume most of the oil and the poor in third world countries will ride electric bikes to work.

Skyhigh

Last edited by SkyHigh; 09-24-2009 at 11:46 AM.
SkyHigh is offline  
Old 09-24-2009, 10:08 AM
  #20  
Gets Weekends Off
 
FighterHayabusa's Avatar
 
Joined APC: Jan 2007
Position: 150 left seat if I'm lucky
Posts: 172
Default

Originally Posted by SkyHigh View Post
Other nations do not seem to have the ability to absorb increasing fuel prices as much as we do.

Skyhigh
This probably has more to do with the tax structure than anything else. Except for middle east countries that subsidize gas for their citizens we have some of the lowest taxes on fuel which keeps it ridiculously cheap.
It's really quite amazing that milk still costs more in general than a gallon of gas considering the refinement required for the latter.

The idea we're on the verge of running out is crazy. We may be running low on the sweet conventional stuff we can produce for a few bucks a barrel, but after that we have oil sands, then shale and synthetic petroleum from coal - all already profitable at today's oil prices. After that there is the oil shale that isn't counted in reserves we haven't quite figured out how to get at, but is likely going to be more cost effective than $140 a barrel.

Personally I get excited during periods of high oil prices because market driven alternatives accelerate and promising technologies emerge from all ends of the alternative energy spectrum.

Government seems to only know how to subsidize corn ethanol which is one of the LEAST promising, even in the ethanol realm. Solar is promising, but not at all in the near term - subsidies are helping bring up efficiency of panels themselves, but no one is really focusing on making the panels cheaper. Both solar and wind require batteries because they can't be "on demand", which really inhibits their practicality.
FighterHayabusa is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
boost
Cargo
20
06-07-2009 05:40 PM
jungle
Money Talk
0
03-08-2009 08:34 PM
jungle
Money Talk
3
03-05-2009 07:16 AM
jungle
Money Talk
2
02-19-2009 07:50 PM
unemployedagain
Hangar Talk
26
02-07-2009 04:37 PM

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Your Privacy Choices