Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Is fast crash likely? Pt. 8

General discussions of the systemic, societal and civilisational effects of depletion.

Re: Is fast crash likely? Pt. 8

Unread postby Antaris » Thu 11 Jan 2018, 23:11:55

Probably not !
Antaris
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 45
Joined: Sun 06 Jan 2013, 00:27:57

Re: Is fast crash likely? Pt. 8

Unread postby aspera » Fri 12 Jan 2018, 02:13:13

Roc: Let me try coming at this in a different way. When you ask,
"...when you get up in the morning do you think about how much energy you must expend to get done the tasks you have to get done to have a happy life? ... you do not."

I'm reminded of optimal foraging theory in wildlife ecology. Over millions of years simple heuristics have evolved within the brains of predators to allow them to answer exactly that question.

Image

Brains smaller than ours are smart enough to break off the chase when they detect the EROEI falling below some threshold.

Now, I wouldn't want to claim that those creatures are carrying out conscious, rational, high-computation analysis. But they are doing some sort of rapid energy balance analysis; if they had not then they'd not have made it into the present gene pool.

If predators have survived by using an evolved EROEI-like calculation, then shouldn't society at least explore if and how such a calculation might help it navigate questions of energy policy (e.g., subsidies, taxes, rules and regs, R&D allocation)?

I would think, given the mess we're in, we should give it a try. Lord knows that whatever decision making methods we've been using up till now have gotten us into quite a fine mess. At least we can try to make the transition easier than it would otherwise be.

(BTW a similar mechanism seems to be at work in humans, and functions on everyday behaviors which you mention in your question: the notions of "willingness to act" and "positive approach" in psychology use a finite and fatigable resource residing in the pre-frontal cortex [that system is variously called "capacity to direct attention" or "ego depletion"] to decide whether to start a new activity or not, and how long to persevere at an ongoing behavior.)
Plant a garden. Soon.
User avatar
aspera
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 45
Joined: Mon 28 Jul 2014, 16:22:49
Location: Lakeland Republic

Re: Is fast crash likely? Pt. 8

Unread postby onlooker » Fri 12 Jan 2018, 09:41:51

Aspera you have it right. The Oil Industry position articulated by Rockdoc, is not accurate and in fact misleading. Economics cannot account for the actual Energy being used up throughout the processes from well to wheel. Pricing is a way to get the economics right and at best roughly aligns with the energy involved. And of course Entropy and Heat loss in any energy procurement process is not accounted for. Lending also interferes with a smooth comparison. Market speculation also. It simply is false to say that one can neatly and exactly translate energy into monetary valuations. In the end society puts arbitrary monetary valuations to all goods and services.

That is why the Etp is groundbreaking. It is firt and foremost trying to gauge the exact btu units of energy being expended in the full cycle of well to wheel. Then it it converts the computed energy into monetary units. That is the more accurate way to determine the Net Energy finally being bequeathed to the entire Economy.
The Big Economic Plunge is approaching
User avatar
onlooker
Anti-Matter
Anti-Matter
 
Posts: 8511
Joined: Sun 10 Nov 2013, 12:49:04
Location: NY, USA

Re: Is fast crash likely? Pt. 8

Unread postby AdamB » Fri 12 Jan 2018, 10:02:34

aspera wrote:What I don't understand is, does your explanation negate there being any usefulness to society at large of considering the gap between well-head EROEI and the extended-EROEI ratio developed by Hall and his colleagues?


Of course it does. And as Hall and Cleveland have been quite willing to prove, they attempted, and failed, at using net energy metrics to predict a collapse in the future, in just one industry, that of oil and gas drilling. By the year 2000. And by collapse...they meant none.

You see any NONE oil and gas drilling going on? Compared to yet another US peak oil (and gas probably) around the corner?
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 3740
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

Re: Is fast crash likely? Pt. 8

Unread postby AdamB » Fri 12 Jan 2018, 10:06:01

shortonoil wrote:
This insanity is the last step to collapse


Yes, most likely. We are entering "a time that will try men's souls"!



Before we get to that, have you paid off on the bet you lost yet?
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 3740
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

Re: Is fast crash likely? Pt. 8

Unread postby AdamB » Fri 12 Jan 2018, 10:11:38

aspera wrote:Well marmico, an EROEI of 30:1 does seem mighty good. But I assume that's at the well-head. Thus it includes only those energy costs directly related to hydrocarbon exploration and production processes.



How would anyone know, when the EROEI metric isn't standardized, and basically made up as folks go along? Here is how you can tell...find ANY peer reviewed source that lists the EROEI contained within the most common tool used in the oil and gas industry. The drilling rig. Any table would do, perhaps a figure?, showing that authors understand and have quantified the energy required to build said rig, account for its movements over its working life, and the energy that then comes out the other side in terms of energy production.

If EROEI folks don't know the most basic of energy information related to this important tool, it doesn't matter what speculative nonsense they then pile on top of random conclusions when making grandiose statements about the EROEI of oil and gas production in general.
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 3740
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

Re: Is fast crash likely? Pt. 8

Unread postby AdamB » Fri 12 Jan 2018, 10:16:22

onlooker wrote:That is why the Etp is groundbreaking.


It is a free country, you are allowed thi BELIEVE this all you'd like.

But ask Short why he hasn't paid up on his bet yet? You see, he used the principles of his random number generator just to pick an up/down DIRECTION based on it...and got it wrong. And now appears to be attempting to welsh on the bet.

So why is it you BELIEVE it is ground breaking, when it can't even be used to get a coin flip guess correct?
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 3740
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

Re: Is fast crash likely? Pt. 8

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Fri 12 Jan 2018, 11:16:35

Now, I wouldn't want to claim that those creatures are carrying out conscious, rational, high-computation analysis. But they are doing some sort of rapid energy balance analysis; if they had not then they'd not have made it into the present gene pool.

If predators have survived by using an evolved EROEI-like calculation, then shouldn't society at least explore if and how such a calculation might help it navigate questions of energy policy (e.g., subsidies, taxes, rules and regs, R&D allocation)?


Your example is not much different than the one I gave. Humans and animals self-regulate. But for some reason, you can't seem to focus on the fact the oil industry also self-regulates in a similar manner. If they can't make money then they stop producing hydrocarbons. If it costs them more for all the various energy inputs then they will throw up their hands in defeat. It is that simple. Now you will hear from people like onlooker whose closest experience with the oil and gas industry has been putting gas into his vehicle that "Oh you can't capture all the energy with monetary measures" which, is of course, a complete copout unless you can actually list all of those things that are energy inputs that are free or not properly valued. I've asked that question several times and the suggestions that come back end up all having some monetary value. The monetary value is a function of demand and supply. As an example years ago when there were extensive shutdowns in steel factories the price of drill pipe and casing skyrocketed. What that meant is that some oil and gas plays that were sitting on the margin of positive economics were sidelined. It simply cost more than the producer would see out of the produced oil. As to the continual BS from these guys that the availability of loans to industry makes the monetary measure invalid....I say they all have their heads up their collective backsides. Banks do not distribute debt for free it costs to borrow and those costs vary with how the economy in general and how the industry is doing. I've seen carrying costs vary from 6% for favored status to as high as 11% for mezzanine rates. If a particular oil and gas play can't bear the additional cost of loan servicing then it will not be pursued for any length of time, again self-regulating.

Doing a calculation, in my mind, is simply looking for an alternative explanation when one is not needed. From an academic standpoint it might be interesting but it doesn't and never has been a means to proper planning for any industry.
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5665
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 02:00:00

Re: Is fast crash likely? Pt. 8

Unread postby shortonoil » Fri 12 Jan 2018, 11:35:10

But ask Short why he hasn't paid up on his bet yet?


Would you stop with your eternal bullshit? The bet is not final until the EIA posts its yearly average WTI price. You are so stupid that your mother probably sent you back. Who ever hired you as a working troll certainly had some very low standards.

Aspera you have it right. The Oil Industry position articulated by Rockdoc, is not accurate and in fact misleading. Economics cannot account for the actual Energy being used up throughout the processes from well to wheel.


We now know why the price of oil did a sudden lunge through the Maximum Affordability curve. We also know why it isn't going to stay there for long. If I get a chance I'll put up the graphs sometime to today. I've still got pipes to repair from the last arctic blast that struck here.
User avatar
shortonoil
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 5242
Joined: Thu 02 Dec 2004, 03:00:00
Location: VA USA

Re: Is fast crash likely? Pt. 8

Unread postby aspera » Fri 12 Jan 2018, 12:09:42

Adamb wrote: ...the EROEI metric isn't standardized

I agree with that. But two things, (1) that's just what science is like in the early days of developing metrics, high variance. From my reading, that variance is declining. But I'm going to go take another look in that peer-reviewed literature. (2) High variance, at this stage, doesn't mean that folks are making things up. Personally, I'd need (peer reviewed) evidence before I made such a claim, otherwise I'd be just making an argumentum ad hominem. And peer-reviewed sources would require retraction of articles if there was evidence of data being made up. I haven't seen any retractions. Do you know of any? That would certainly put a very different spin on their research.

Roc: Thanks for the insights from inside the industry. I still feel that we are using different levels of analysis. Yours seem (to me at least) an inside-the-industry perspective. And, despite what onlooker suggests (e.g., that not all sources/subsidies are being accounted for), your repetition is convincing enough that following-the-money does well enough for that industry, at least in its past and current decision making.

But I'm trying to understand this from a very different, and much broader level of analysis, that of a society making decisions over time, about the future, for all its citizens and all its industries. Where it seems that just following-the-money may have gotten us into a mess.

So here's another try (a little Bayesian playfulness if you will): looking to the future, and assuming we need new tools, metrics, methods to help society. And maybe to provide independent evidence as to what other methods (e.g., following-the-money) are telling us. Is EROEI a candidate metric? (We'd have, of course to reduce the variance AdamB points out, but that would be true of ANY new metric).
Plant a garden. Soon.
User avatar
aspera
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 45
Joined: Mon 28 Jul 2014, 16:22:49
Location: Lakeland Republic

Re: Is fast crash likely? Pt. 8

Unread postby onlooker » Fri 12 Jan 2018, 13:08:58

Okay, first off I will be careful not to delve into the details and technical intricacies of the Oil Industry. But, this statement caught my eye "your repetition is convincing enough that following-the-money does well enough for that industry, at least in its past and current decision making. ". In the past the Oil Industry was making so much money that an exact correlation between economics and energy was not needed or a problem. But the present is markedly different. Shale/Tar by many accounts on the Net are not profitable especially long term. So, if you want to follow the economic logic, than we can say that the Oil Industry is being forced to avail itself of less profitable/more energy intensive sources. I did not say no connection exists between energy and money. And the situation is becoming clearer because the Oil Industry is no longer a massively profitable industry. Quite the opposite now, it is becoming rapidly a losing economic proposition. So, I will turn the tables on Rock and the Oil Industry and say that the existing but loose correlations between of energy and money is becoming more evident because our Entire Civilization depends still tremendously on the energy and uses of Oil. So, the perturbations and the taking on of great amounts of Debt by the Oil Industry is being reflected in perturbations in the entire Economy. EROEI, Aspera should have been an important metric at least since 2005, when we began to see problems manifesting in the Oil Industry
The Big Economic Plunge is approaching
User avatar
onlooker
Anti-Matter
Anti-Matter
 
Posts: 8511
Joined: Sun 10 Nov 2013, 12:49:04
Location: NY, USA

Re: Is fast crash likely? Pt. 8

Unread postby AdamB » Fri 12 Jan 2018, 16:17:23

shortonoil wrote:
But ask Short why he hasn't paid up on his bet yet?


Would you stop with your eternal bullshit?


Is that a yes, or a no?
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 3740
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

Re: Is fast crash likely? Pt. 8

Unread postby AdamB » Fri 12 Jan 2018, 16:24:56

aspera wrote:
Adamb wrote: ...the EROEI metric isn't standardized

I agree with that. But two things, (1) that's just what science is like in the early days of developing metrics, high variance.


Really? So now, in the non-early days of science, the international society of energy return on energy investment can't hold a conference and decide which inputs to include, how to do it, how to measure the outputs, all that sort of stuff? Why not?

aspera wrote: From my reading, that variance is declining. But I'm going to go take another look in that peer-reviewed literature. (2) High variance, at this stage, doesn't mean that folks are making things up.


That depends. Have you seen anyone use published tables of oil and gas drilling rigs to determine that most important and critical part of the "investment" issue when applying this metric to oil and gas development? And if no such table exists, I don't need to call it "making it up", because that is what it is. At this point, prior to said conference deciding what and who determines tables for these types of values.

aspera wrote:Personally, I'd need (peer reviewed) evidence before I made such a claim, otherwise I'd be just making an argumentum ad hominem. And peer-reviewed sources would require retraction of articles if there was evidence of data being made up. I haven't seen any retractions. Do you know of any? That would certainly put a very different spin on their research.


I know I've never seen any such thing as an accounting of oil and gas drilling rig eroei estimates from Charlie or Cutler. The two who did do a peer reviewed paper claiming that because of net energy, the US would stop drilling oil wells by the year 2000.

aspera wrote:So here's another try (a little Bayesian playfulness if you will): looking to the future, and assuming we need new tools, metrics, methods to help society. And maybe to provide independent evidence as to what other methods (e.g., following-the-money) are telling us. Is EROEI a candidate metric? (We'd have, of course to reduce the variance AdamB points out, but that would be true of ANY new metric).


What DOES following the money tell someone, if that someone is a believer that EROEI matters within the oil and gas industry? As the resident professionals have pointed out, never in the history of the industry has any decision been based on this metric, in ANY form, across 3 centuries, 100'000's of projects, millions of wells, tens of thousands of fields.

So the onus would appear to be on those who want to invent the new metric and apply it to where it has never mattered before, rather than the system that has worked longer than any of us have been alive, and is still going strong, and reacting the same way nowadays as it has across those 3 centuries and millions of wells now.
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 3740
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

Re: Is fast crash likely? Pt. 8

Unread postby AdamB » Fri 12 Jan 2018, 16:39:54

onlooker wrote: In the past the Oil Industry was making so much money that an exact correlation between economics and energy was not needed or a problem.


See where you BELIEVING gets you? So Texaco made so much money did it? Global Marine? C.W. Riggs? Placid Oil Company? Oxoco? Charter Company? Didn't need to worry about economics and energy decades ago...and led them into bankruptcy.

Who would have thunk it except someone who just wants to BELIEVE.

onlooker wrote: So, I will turn the tables on Rock and the Oil Industry and say that the existing but loose correlations between of energy and money is becoming more evident because our Entire Civilization depends still tremendously on the energy and uses of Oil.


A nice strawman that says nothing about BELIEF in net energy, but uses platitudes that seem reasonable. Yup. Civilization depends on energy. But you've got the scheme wrong. Here is something you can read and learn about what is even more important, which is that WASTING energy is what we are getting really, really good at, and to our profit and well being no less.

A book I'll bet that onlloker will never even ATTEMPT to read, because he won't be able to walk his belief system past the title, let alone read it and THINK

onlooker wrote:So, the perturbations and the taking on of great amounts of Debt by the Oil Industry is being reflected in perturbations in the entire Economy. EROEI, Aspera should have been an important metric at least since 2005, when we began to see problems manifesting in the Oil Industry


Again, go and read The Prize. PLEASE. Then you won't say stuff this stupid. Peak oilers already have pstarr as a figurehead of lying and ignorance, they don't need another one onlooker.

And from those of us who were in industry in 1986, what you think mattered in 2005 ain't nothing compared to what began building with global peak oil and arrived in the spring of 1986. Some of us were there onlooker, another reason why there is no need for us to believe a word you say. You prove mostly that you might not even have been ALIVE back then. How about rationing? Were you around for that, back in the late 1970's, or are you a millennial or something and only know stuff from YouTube rather than having lived it?
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 3740
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

Re: Is fast crash likely? Pt. 8

Unread postby onlooker » Fri 12 Jan 2018, 17:03:53

Please, "WHY WE WILL NEVER RUN OUT OF ENERGY" seriously? You expect me to take that serious. It is this type of thinking that has our species on the doorstep of utter disaster. I know Adam, you cannot be reasoned with because you are either a direct or indirect shill for the Oil Industry. You hardly ever post on any other forum not related to Oil and your emotional zeal gives you away.

Me, I have just an interested person who stumbled upon this site and found its main topic interesting. My interests go beyond just Energy but the whole gamut of unsustainable practices of our species. Energy is not our only problem far from it. So even if you are right about the Energy situation, that only serves to allow our species to continue its assault upon the Earth and continue further populating it, till we run out of resources and spoil and degrade the Biosphere so much that it ALL comes crashing down. The vehemence in attacking the Etp shows how emotionally invested you guys are in keeping sacrosanct the "optimistic" message of the Oil Industry. Even as quite a number of insiders are casting doubts on this version of things. So, like Pstarr, just having fun now watching people like you Adam seeing the trees but not the Forest.
The Big Economic Plunge is approaching
User avatar
onlooker
Anti-Matter
Anti-Matter
 
Posts: 8511
Joined: Sun 10 Nov 2013, 12:49:04
Location: NY, USA

Re: Is fast crash likely? Pt. 8

Unread postby aspera » Fri 12 Jan 2018, 17:25:03

AdamB wrote: Really? So now, in the non-early days of science, the international society of energy return on energy investment can't hold a conference and decide which inputs to include, how to do it, how to measure the outputs, all that sort of stuff? Why not?

I know of no such society. I've got https://biophyseco.org/ and http://bpeconomics.org. Enlighten me? Or were you just screwing around with me?

I wonder if we would have written the same responses to others (e.g., Newton, Faraday, Shockley) when they were working out the kinks in their thinking? I wouldn't have thought so.

AdamB wrote: So the onus would appear to be on those who want to invent the new metric and apply it to where it has never mattered before...

Absolutely. I agree. The onus is on them. And rightly so. (...and paradigms shift, one funeral at a time...)

The only thing I'd disagree with you about is that you seem to think I'm advocating for the use of EROEI for the oil and gas industry. I'm not. I'm asking about metrics for helping society make decisions during and after a dramatic resource descent. Different group. Different scale. Different goal.

I can accept that basic economic analysis (e.g., follow-the-money) might work for society at that time. I can also accept that ecological economics and biophysical economics might offer new insights that help society do better than it would without such insights.

As far as the oil and gas industry goes. I'm no expert, just a student, learning through reading (lurking) and recently by engaging. For O&G, following-the-money may have worked for them in the past (and I understand that you would change this to "did work for them") on an ongoing basis. Clearly you believe that it will work for them in the future despite any looming changes to the economy they exist within.

I envy your extreme clarity and confidence. It's only that when I think about society and energy, I don't share it. I'm looking for new ways of modeling things.
Plant a garden. Soon.
User avatar
aspera
Coal
Coal
 
Posts: 45
Joined: Mon 28 Jul 2014, 16:22:49
Location: Lakeland Republic

Re: Is fast crash likely? Pt. 8

Unread postby pstarr » Fri 12 Jan 2018, 17:26:03

I took all the industry shills off ignore. They used to bother me, but finally when AdamB left (was fired?) from his internship at Chesapeake to take his thankless job here . . . I was simply dumbfounded (eyes wide open 8O ).

He and the industry are so damn broke . . . that they resort to this? Spamming this place?

eyes wide open 8O lol
/sarc
pstarr
NeoMaster
NeoMaster
 
Posts: 26767
Joined: Mon 27 Sep 2004, 02:00:00
Location: Behind the Redwood Curtain

Re: Is fast crash likely? Pt. 8

Unread postby vtsnowedin » Fri 12 Jan 2018, 17:35:19

One thing we often overlook is that the price we pay at the pump includes a big chunk of taxes, both extracted by the exporting country where the oil originated and the consuming country to pay for infrastructure. It can be as high as sixty percent of the price of the finished oil product. As EROEI goes down and prices rise the first thing we should do is force governments to take a smaller slice of the pie as reducing the size of government in our lives will have a much smaller negative effect (if any) then reducing the amount of fuel in our tanks will.
User avatar
vtsnowedin
Anti-Matter
Anti-Matter
 
Posts: 8317
Joined: Fri 11 Jul 2008, 02:00:00

Re: Is fast crash likely? Pt. 8

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Fri 12 Jan 2018, 17:44:34

In the past the Oil Industry was making so much money that an exact correlation between economics and energy was not needed or a problem. But the present is markedly different


That is not the case at all. I’ve been involved in the business for 35 + years, lately only peripherally but what I can tell you is there was never a point where companies were making so much money that economics didn’t matter, never. We worried about economics of projects back in the sixties, we worried about them in the seventies and the eighties and the nineties etc. We were always skirting the edge of what was and was not profitable to pursue. Those economics changed over time…deep water became economic, heavy oil mining became economic etc. Folks who have never been involved seem to think that a few decades ago it was just shooting fish in a barrel, never was. Historically the oil and gas industry has had one of the lower return on investments, there never was a time when it made so much money that no one cared what they spent it on. In the period from 2011 to 2015 earnings per dollar sales in the oil industry was less than half that in the apparel industry and a fifth of that in pharmaceuticals. Average return on investment in oil and gas in 2013 as an example was about the same as 2003 and greater than 1999, in 2009 at the bottom of the recession ROI in the oil industry was still higher than in 2001 and about the same as 1999. A similar pattern shows up if you look at Return on Equity.

And the situation is becoming clearer because the Oil Industry is no longer a massively profitable industry. Quite the opposite now, it is becoming rapidly a losing economic proposition


Horeshit. If you exclude the 2015 and 2016 time period with bottomed out oil prices oil companies have been pretty consistent in their profitability. You and Short have a serious problem in understanding oil and gas accounting and what that means to the bottom line. But maybe you should call up all the executive at the hundreds of oil and gas companies around the world and tell them they don’t understand that they aren’t making any money and they have a losing economic proposition.

The vehemence in attacking the Etp shows how emotionally invested you guys are in keeping sacrosanct the "optimistic" message of the Oil Industry. Even as quite a number of insiders are casting doubts on this version of things


No, the vehemence has to do with the fact that Short and the rest of the ETP crowd seem to have zero understanding of anything whatsoever to do with the oil industry. The statements that are made by these individuals are easily falsifiable with data that is readily accessible but when corrected they continue to spout the same nonsense. The fact that the model is bolstered by such ignorance and requires decreasing oil demand at a time when it continues to increase should be instructive to all.
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5665
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 02:00:00

Re: Is fast crash likely? Pt. 8

Unread postby pstarr » Fri 12 Jan 2018, 17:50:28

" reducing the size of government in our lives will have a much smaller negative effect (if any) then reducing the amount of fuel in our tanks will."

that is dogma without reference or data.
/sarc
pstarr
NeoMaster
NeoMaster
 
Posts: 26767
Joined: Mon 27 Sep 2004, 02:00:00
Location: Behind the Redwood Curtain

PreviousNext

Return to Peak Oil Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests