Fatih Birol interview: 'Leave oil before it leaves us'

GoghGoner · **Joined:** Thu Apr 10, 2008 12:00 am **Posts:** 652

Quote:

Birol:
I can already tell you that in our "World Energy Outlook 2008" which will be published in November we will deal in depth with the prospects of the oil and gas production. We will take a look at the 350 most important oil and gas fields and explore how much production rates are sinking and what that means.

Schneider:
What do you mean by that?

Birol:
As far as I know this will be the first profound public study in which we verify and revise our knowledge about how much oil and gas is going to the markets. Many people will come to new conclusions about this.

Lately, I am beginning to wonder if we might power-down softly but then I read this.

Quote:

Birol:
That causes great strain on everyone and on our economic systems. When I look at the future, I see three strategic challenges in the energy sector: The first is oil and gas security. Just recently Russia has lowered its gas delivery to the Ukraine by 25 %. The second is climate change. And the third, and one has to admit we don't much talk about this, is the connection between energy and poverty, for example in Africa. Today 1.6 billion people, that is 40 % of the global population, have no access to electric power.

Seriously, wasn't this guy a cheerleader for oil companies just last year?

Quote:

Schneider:
Let's assume the prices escalate - who will be hit first?

Birol:
It will be about who can afford x dollar per barrel. Some will be able to, others won't. The OECD countries will be among the lucky ones, but the developing countries will ...

Schneider:
... be the losers ...

Birol:
Exactly!

Schneider:
If I understand you correctly, you say that the demand for oil could rise 3 % globally every year, while we have to expect a decrease of 4 % in oil production in the time from now until 2015. That would be 7 % each year which are missing.

Birol:
The demand might increase a little slower. But there could be a large gap between what should be there and what actually will be there, especially if we do not put massive efforts into improving the efficiency of cars or change to other transportation systems. If we don't take measures on the consumer side, the consumption will continue to grow. And if we have not invested enough into oil production, we will flounder.

I'm sorry about editing this and putting in more quotes but each one is more astounding than the next to me.

Birol Interview

Starvid · **Posted:** Fri May 02, 2008 3:21 pm

Birol has been PO-aware for several years and is warning that if nothing is done with the global energy system, "the wheels may come off."

The interview where he says it, it's dated nov 7 2007.

It's very, very good.

http://us.ft.com/ftgateway/superpage.ft ... 230&page=2

seahorse2 · **Joined:** Mon Oct 18, 2004 12:00 am **Posts:** 2056

Thanks for the post. Not very promising, but a necessary alarm bell from someone that, hopefully, people will listen to.

americandream · **Posted:** Fri May 02, 2008 3:32 pm

Starvid wrote:

Birol has been PO-aware for several years and is warning that if nothing is done with the global energy system, "the wheels will come off."

There's nothing we can do apart from abandon a consumerist system devoted to profiting a few very well off individuals, and instead turn to a collective system based on modest level of resource usage...sooner rather than later.

Oil is at the base of the energy pyramid. Irrespective of how many layers of renewables you lay atop the base, you will come back to oil to prop up that pyramid. The further out we extend consumerism across this globe, the more intractable does the problem of oil conservation become.

GoghGoner · **Joined:** Thu Apr 10, 2008 12:00 am **Posts:** 652

Starvid wrote:

Birol has been PO-aware for several years and is warning that if nothing is done with the global energy system, "the wheels will come off."

The interview where he says it, it's dated nov 7 2007.

It's very, very good.

http://us.ft.com/ftgateway/superpage.ft ... 230&page=2

This is from late 2007, too.

Quote:

Speaking at the launch of the IEA’s latest World Energy Outlook in London, Mr Birol reiterated both the Agency’s long term forecast that oil production will reach 116 million barrels per day in 2030.

And this from the article posted today

Quote:

Birol:
I would be very surprised if the oil productions would effortlessly increase during the next 20 to 25 years to meet, lets say, 120 mb a day without any problems. Even if the potential should be there, we will not get this oil to the markets. The conclusion is that we have to be prepared to see very turbulent, tight and high prices oil markets - this will not be good for the economy.

He is now a doomer!!!

Starvid · **Posted:** Fri May 02, 2008 4:04 pm

GoghGoner wrote:

This is from late 2007, too.

Quote:

Speaking at the launch of the IEA’s latest World Energy Outlook in London, Mr Birol reiterated both the Agency’s long term forecast that oil production will reach 116 million barrels per day in 2030.

You have to understand that IEA oil consumption forecasts are demand based.

They take a look at the historical link between GDP growth and oil consumption growth, and then extrapolate oil demand (which they call production) from a given rate of global GDP growth.

It's more of a model than a prediction of physical reality.

mos6507 · **Posted:** Fri May 02, 2008 5:10 pm

When stuff like this hits CNN I'll be more impressed. Energy Bulletin is a "preaching to the converted" source.

americandream · **Posted:** Fri May 02, 2008 7:58 pm

Starvid wrote:

GoghGoner wrote:

This is from late 2007, too.

Quote:

Speaking at the launch of the IEA’s latest World Energy Outlook in London, Mr Birol reiterated both the Agency’s long term forecast that oil production will reach 116 million barrels per day in 2030.

You have to understand that IEA oil consumption forecasts are demand based.

They take a look at the historical link between GDP growth and oil consumption growth, and then extrapolate oil demand (which they call production) from a given rate of global GDP growth.

It's more of a model than a prediction of physical reality.

I like fellows like you. You're always stirring up confusion and thereby muddying the issues. What is the physical reality?

Will we ever know? Taking your indecisiveness to its ultimate limit, we will never know what the physical limts of this planets crude reserves are given a whole raft of reasons that come to mind, some technological, some economic, some geologic and so forth so why bother doing anything! For all we know, the planet may be awash with oil in reserves deep below currently accessible sources.

In the final analysis, all assumptions as regards our planet's resources such as oil will be based on models and reasonable, sometimes unreasonable guestimates.

All we can do is take the one that conforms most closely with the extrapolation each of us consider reasonable and run with it. Clearly, if you are of the view that peak oil is a weak model, then may I suggest that you remove yourself to a website that caters for your views rather than create confusion and indecisiveness here. I am sure the guys at CERA would be delighted with your input.

And the best model will win in time! Have no fear.

Starvid · **Posted:** Sat May 03, 2008 5:27 am

Jesus christ monkey balls, what's wrong with you?

Muddying up the issues? I'm explaining IEA's warped thinking so people understand not even IEA ever believed in the 115-120 mbpd numbers! Those numbers are predicted demand at a given price, not predicted real physical supply!

And indecisiveness? I've on numerous occasions stated exactly what I think need to be done, and that it should have been done yesterday!

FreddyH · **Posted:** Sun May 04, 2008 1:21 am

IEA also performs a bottom-up analysis that projects a plateau of 86.5-mbd until 2015, followed by reduced peak of 100-mbd in 2030.

This 2007 Alternative Scenario is based on a 7.7% Underlying Decline Rate in mature Conventional non-opec fields. Overall, IEA calculates a 3.75% Underlying Decline rate for All Liquids.

This was IEA's most conservative Outlook since its first forecast of a Peak in 1998.

TheDude · **Posted:** Sun May 04, 2008 2:10 am

Wow.

Quote:

Birol: Even if the oil reserves of Saudi-Arabia should be estimated wrongly by 50 %, they could increase their production from 12 mb a day to 18 mb. But I don't think they will raise production that much in the next 25 years. So there are mainly three different problems: geology, investment and policy of the main oil producers. Those three aspects taken together make the future of oil very difficult.

Even though the 50% figure was prompted by the interviewer (using the case of the EWG study), it's a bit hair raising with Birol considering the notion that those OPEC reserves might really just be pure paper. And he's calling for real transparency from producers - just like Simmons has been doing!

It would be really wild if this became a ball to kick around during elections.

pstarr · **Posted:** Sun May 04, 2008 9:47 am

FreddyH wrote:

IEA also performs a bottom-up analysis that projects a plateau of 86.5-mbd until 2015, followed by reduced peak of 100-mbd in 2030.

This 2007 Alternative Scenario is based on a 7.7% Underlying Decline Rate in mature Conventional non-opec fields. Overall, IEA calculates a 3.75% Underlying Decline rate for All Liquids.

This was IEA's most conservative Outlook since its first forecast of a Peak in 1998.

What is this gobbledygook? I just read that IEA bases it's production projections on historical demand trends (see Starvid immediately above). So how can you suggest IEA performs a 'bottom up analysis'? Does IEA dig holes in the ground?

How can a plateau ending in 2015 turn into a 'reduced' peak 15 years later? Do you intentionally obfuscate FreddyH?

TheDude · **Posted:** Sun May 04, 2008 1:59 pm

pstarr wrote:

FreddyH wrote:

IEA also performs a bottom-up analysis that projects a plateau of 86.5-mbd until 2015, followed by reduced peak of 100-mbd in 2030.

This 2007 Alternative Scenario is based on a 7.7% Underlying Decline Rate in mature Conventional non-opec fields. Overall, IEA calculates a 3.75% Underlying Decline rate for All Liquids.

This was IEA's most conservative Outlook since its first forecast of a Peak in 1998.

What is this gobbledygook? I just read that IEA bases it's production projections on historical demand trends (see Starvid immediately above). So how can you suggest IEA performs a 'bottom up analysis'? Does IEA dig holes in the ground?

Well, for WEO 2008 they promise this:

Quote:

• Crude oil and natural gas production prospects: How will geology affect future hydrocarbon supplies? Will investment be adequate? Through field-by-field analysis of production trends at hundreds of the world’s largest fields, an assessment of the potential for finding and developing new reserves, and a bottom-up analysis of upstream costs and investment, WEO 2008 takes a hard look at future global oil and gas supply.

Order now - special price of a mere €108. Dunno if they've done bottom up analysis before - is that what you're implying Fred?

Quote:

How can a plateau ending in 2015 turn into a 'reduced' peak 15 years later? Do you intentionally obfuscate FreddyH?

All I know about Freddy's projections is that they seem to change every other week, making them...less than useful...damned if I can tell what's changed to make him revise the peak date by 6 years on the drop of a hat.

Quote:

After all additions & revisions this week, the net effect on the TrendLines AVG was that the Peak Rate falls to 91-mbd (from 93) and advances to 2013 (from 2017). The back drop is a 2010 to 2024 Plateau (defined as within 2-mbd of Peak Rate). As such, there have been and will continue to be significant date shifts of The Peak upon minimal Peak Rate adjustments.

Think the plateau's the important thing. Believe that if you want.

Quote:

With all the silly talk at the EnergyResources-YahooGroup, theOilDrum & PeakOil.com, a Worst Case Scenario (WCS) is introduced today. The majority of Peaksters chat about running out of oil and their preparations for a MadMax lifestyle. Y'all know the drill: buy cabin, buy rifles, booby-trap homestead periphery, load-up on ammo, bury dry food cache, etc as they await the collapse of the American Empire, the Dollar & society in general. Five billion souls will Die-off in the dire Apocalypse. And it all starts in a few days...

What, no cannibalism?

LastViking · **Posted:** Sun May 04, 2008 2:25 pm

pstarr wrote:

FreddyH wrote:

IEA also performs a bottom-up analysis that projects a plateau of 86.5-mbd until 2015, followed by reduced peak of 100-mbd in 2030.

This 2007 Alternative Scenario is based on a 7.7% Underlying Decline Rate in mature Conventional non-opec fields. Overall, IEA calculates a 3.75% Underlying Decline rate for All Liquids.

This was IEA's most conservative Outlook since its first forecast of a Peak in 1998.

What is this gobbledygook? I just read that IEA bases it's production projections on historical demand trends (see Starvid immediately above). So how can you suggest IEA performs a 'bottom up analysis'? Does IEA dig holes in the ground?

How can a plateau ending in 2015 turn into a 'reduced' peak 15 years later? Do you intentionally obfuscate FreddyH?

It is the IEA's Reference Scenario with its 116-mbd Peak in 2030 that is Demand based ... not the Alternative Scenario that i referenced.

pstarr · **Posted:** Sun May 04, 2008 2:26 pm

FreddyH wrote:

Peak Oil Theory has been replaced as focus at theOilDrum by 100's of ad nauseum daily posts on DieOFF, the coming USA Depression, pending collapse of the world's currencies; hate posts against their President, Congress, the Federal Reserve, all agencies' statistics, the IMF, the UN; anybody that doesn't agree that Oil peaked in 2005. I predicted in January that the conversation was about to deteriorate to discussing human poop for fertilizer use by their nihilist posters that moved to the mountains and are awaiting the anti-christ and the Global Warming induced Great Flood. Well, last week humanure was the topic of the day by the lunatic fringe that has hijacked that once excellent forum. It's a cult that gleefully awaits the collapse of the USA with a desire to turn the evil Empire into an agrarian society in Old Order Amish/Mennonites fashion with no electricity, planes or cars. After almost 2 years, I'm oudda there. TOD has PEAKED...

those wusses at the OilDrum are still talking about humanure when we have moved on to slugomanure and cockroachanure and best of all . . . ratamanure

And we are all he has left. :cry:

Fatih Birol interview: 'Leave oil before it leaves us'

Who is online