Let's Discuss Peak Oil For A Change

[peeker01]

Since PO has been nearly devoid of peak oil discussion, I feel compelled to post this article from Seeking Alpha discussing how 2010 was not a peak for petroleum production. I hope this re-kindles the po discussion, but at the very least, it will start the ad homs flowing again.
Seeking Alpha

[Pops]

Yea, if you are looking for a trade of ad homs that's a good starting point, the opening paragraph of your article is just that:

Like the TV show Twin Peaks in the 1990s, “Peak Oil” theory also has a cult following. A day doesn’t go by that we do not hear about peak oil, and a lot of time is devoted to these types of conspiracy theories without solid analysis. The message becomes the foundation for erratic thinking, and ultimately erroneous investments. What is sad is that the theory as presented is given validity, and only amounts to -- in a best-case scenario -- intellectual fraud.

I guess that make your post and thread ad hom, eye-poking by proxy.

[peeker01]

That's very revealing Pops. When I read that first paragraph, Oil Age ,Oil Drum and LATOC came to
mind. I don't think of my buds here at PO to be cultists, but maybe I am wrong. Should I think
that way?

Try and get past that first paragraph, would ya, and let me know what you think of the data he
presents. This is about data, right?

[dolanbaker]

Well, the current "bumpy plateau" in production could easily continue for another couple of years, plus the addition of other liquids to the stats, it will appear as multiple peaks.

One thing that can't be disputed is the fact that production is not keeping up with demand, it's being rationed by price!

I don't expect a crash in supply, but I do see greater competition between the west and the BRIC's for the dwindling exports over the next few years, the BRIC's will outbid the OECD countries simply because the oil is worth more to them.
For example an Indian shopkeeper is prepared to pay 30% more to fuel his van to keep his shop stocked, whereas a footballers wife will do fewer journeys in the chelsea tractor to town.

[dsula]

One thing that can't be disputed is the fact that production is not keeping up with demand, it's being rationed by price!

Surprisingly demand is about the same as production. Or should one say, production is about the same as demand?

[peeker01]

Surprisingly demand is about the same as production. Or should one say, production is about the same as demand?

That's a fallacy I think that is often indulged. Supply is physically matched to demand, because you can only store so much crude. Ask yourself, is it possible for supply to be matched so closely to demand, month after month, or is it purposely managed that way to keep crude from overflowing the storage tanks?

[TheDude]

Your man at SA quotes an article from Gail, then posts a graph of a world oil forecast from Tony, as if they were from the same pen. That alone makes him not worth paying attention to.

Like so many others he castigates anyone who even dares to suggest this topic is worthy of analysis in any form as a crackpot.

[dsula]

That's a fallacy I think that is often indulged. Supply is physically matched to demand, because you can only store so much crude. Ask yourself, is it possible for supply to be matched so closely to demand, month after month, or is it purposely managed that way to keep crude from overflowing the storage tanks?

People talk about "supply don't match demand anymore, or supply don't match demand in the years to come".
My grandfather owned a small tractor and he sure had the demand for diesel, but he couldn't always afford it. He had to do the work by hand, sometimes. So even 70 years ago, demand already outstripped supply, because my grandfather had the demand, but couldn't pay for it. Just like today, there's the demand but many people can't pay for it.

[peeker01]

who's gail and tony?

[kublikhan]

I read the article. The guy seems peeved that he can't make a sure thing fortune investing in energy based on peak oil theory. Boohoo, cry me a river. There is no such thing as a sure thing and anyone selling you one is selling snake oil. There is nothing in peak oil theory that says if you put your money in X you will reap great rewards at no risk.

You can however make educated guesses about how a diminishing supply of oil will effect the investment environment in the years to come and plan your portfolio accordingly. But even on this board this is no consensus on what exactly that might be. We have gold bugs, and those who scoff at the stuffy yellow metal and warn that it's bubble is about to pop. We have those investing in oil stocks and oil futures, and those who scoff that demand destruction is going to destroy the value of those investments. And then we have those who think the entire investment idea is a fools errand in light of peak oil and you should cash out now when the gettin's good. None of these bets is a sure thing.

That doesn't mean the author should start out by labeling peak oil theory "intellectual fraud", especially when he himself writes that he agrees that oil production will hit a peak sometime in the future.

BTW peeker, perhaps you can explain to me why you don't seem like a "peak oil bud" to me. You seem more like a certain troll. Am I just missing your warm and fuzzy side?

[peeker01]

Hey Kub, why don't you address the numbers being presented. You know, the same numbers
my buds rocdoc and oilfinder so patiently present week after week.

[Outcast_Searcher]

Just like today, there's the demand but many people can't pay for it.

+1

This is the obvious, in our face point. The economics of acquiring and burning hydrocarbons in sufficient quantity to supply global demand. PERIOD.

All but the cornies who assume that "technology will save us, just wait a bit" can generally see this.

I think we're wasting a lot of energy (EGAD what a pun! - by accident, I swear) arguing about the details of geological peak oil theory, EROEI, and various estimates of resources, recoverable resources, etc. Those things, nor the slow, painful progress in "green tech" match the alarming net demand growth from the likes of Chindia, and the clear economic consequenses for all but the very wealthy. (i.e. watered down real-world Obama-led U.S. cafe standards, if and when we actually get them, won't BEGIN to be enough mitigation).

Clearly the "BAU growth at ANY cost" crowd, which is backed by industry and has, basically, all the money, will try using any means of obfuscation to keep their gravy train running for as long as possible (and keeping the average middle class drone from realizing the hammer is approaching). This BAU crowd is so powerful, that I don't see any realistic way to get around it.

[Cloud9]

I do not have the luxury of working for anyone of the entities that benefits from the Federal Reserve cash machine. My wages are going in one direction and the price of gasoline is going in another. I am markedly poorer than I was in 2006.

Maybe it is the debasement of the currency. Maybe it’s the end of a bubble. Just maybe it is the end of cheap oil. If it is the latter, then that shatters the paradigm of the perpetual growth crowd. That is the source of the vitriol. Because, if peak oil is true, it is the end of an age.

I have supreme confidence in the American military. It is the one thing we do exceptionally well. The planners in the military are trying to figure out how to run the American war machine without oil. They are doing that for a reason. If you are wise, you will take notice and plan accordingly.

http://www.examiner.com/energy-in-natio ... s-post-oil

[Carlhole]

Since PO has been nearly devoid of peak oil discussion, I feel compelled to post this article from
Seeking Alpha discussing how 2010 was not a peak for petroleum production. I hope this re-kindles
the po discussion, but at the very least, it will start the ad homs flowing again.

http://seekingalpha.com/article/259333- ... s-new-peak

It looks increasingly like it will be a demand peak.

Best recent book on the subject: Oil Panic and the Global Crisis: Predictions & Myths

This book places both sides of the peak oil argument side-by-side and allows the reader to make up his mind as the validity of either argument. It's a powerful load of info.

Of course, none of the members of PO.com read things contrary to their emotional dogma, so if YOU do, you'll be able to wax them in any debate.

The book limits itself to petroleum for the most part. It doesn't go into speculated technologies.

[dorlomin]

Since PO has been nearly devoid of peak oil discussion, I feel compelled to post this article from Seeking Alpha discussing how 2010 was not a peak for petroleum production. I hope this re-kindles the po discussion, but at the very least, it will start the ad homs flowing again.
Seeking Alpha

0/10

[Keith_McClary]

with the peak value shown as 81.73 million barrels, with the EIA, among others, listed as a source.
To the average person, and taking into consideration that honesty prevails in our social fabric, the pretty graph above can easily be viewed as the truth, and the need to question the facts behind the picture is not very apparent.

But for starters, world oil production in 2008 was 85,494,789, barrels according to the Energy Information Administration.

Before making accusations of dishonesty, the writer should have checked the sources of the graphs. The difference is probably due to including biodiesel, synthetic oil from coal, etc. in the definition of "oil".

[John_A]

Since PO has been nearly devoid of peak oil discussion, I feel compelled to post this article from Seeking Alpha discussing how 2010 was not a peak for petroleum production. I hope this re-kindles the po discussion, but at the very least, it will start the ad homs flowing again.
Seeking Alpha

Peak oil happened in 2006.

http://www.good.is/post/international-e ... d-in-2006/

It was awful. But practically speaking, it hasn't been able to stop a damn NASCAR race, so of course the concentration has been on cooler stuff, politics, the weather, natural disasters, and different flavors of financial pontification.

The idea that we might actually start talking about peak oil again is so..alien..?

[kublikhan]

Hey Kub, why don't you address the numbers being presented. You know, the same numbers
my buds rocdoc and oilfinder so patiently present week after week.

What numbers are you talking about? Are you trying to prove to me peak oil did not happen in year x? I never said it did. Peak oil will only be know for sure many years after it happens. Pointing at a failed prediction date and laughing does not invalidate peak oil theory. Anymore than throwing a pie in the air and declaring gravity does not exist invalidates gravitational theory. Eventually it is going to come back to smack you in the face.

[peeker01]

Ah-ha, the old pie in the face theory! Now I get it.

[John_A]

Peak oil will only be know for sure many years after it happens.

That sure isn't how Hubbert did it. He called it 15 years in advance. Well. One anyway. But if the bell shaped curve has any predictive power whatsoever, you should be able to predict peak at least a few years in advance. Like Deffeyes did, using Hubbert's method.

Pointing at a failed prediction date and laughing does not invalidate peak oil theory.

True. Claiming it can only be predicted after the fact does that.