Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

Peak Oil.. Who are you to say?

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

Re: Peak Oil.. Who are you to say?

Unread postby AdamB » Wed 27 Sep 2017, 22:04:35

Revi wrote:I call it the Dragon King lately. Nobody understood me when I used Peak Oil anyway. The Dragon King is much scarier and more hip sounding! Or the Net-energy predicament. That does a nice job of describing our present crisis.


What crisis? You not able to get gasoline to get to the coast this past summer?
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 3384
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

Re: Peak Oil.. Who are you to say?

Unread postby asg70 » Thu 28 Sep 2017, 19:55:49

Revi wrote:This is what I am talking about. This is a pretty good summation of our situation:
http://www.resilience.org/stories/2017-08-03/whats-really-driving-global-economic-crisis-net-energy-decline/


Doomers are in their own reality distortion field.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/20 ... 711674001/
“Hate, it has caused a lot of problems in the world, but has not solved one yet.” --Maya Angelou
asg70
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 1298
Joined: Sun 05 Feb 2017, 13:17:28

Re: Peak Oil.. Who are you to say?

Unread postby midnight-gamer » Sun 01 Oct 2017, 00:18:37

It seems short-sighted to come on here and make blanket statements about who was right and wrong ten + years ago. To my knowledge, Peakoil.com circa 2005-2008 didn't have a unified opinion about the future -- the predictions were as diverse as the posters themselves. I believe it's reasonable to have concluded that a fast crash was *one* possible outcome based on the available data at that time; Fracking, an emergent technology, came out of left field, from a bit player I might add. Additionally, it seemed just as likely that oil-holding nations might opt to hold onto their reserves rather than selling it even faster. If posters here are to make unbiased predictions, then their arguments ought to build on truth and be careful not to misrepresent that truth. Finally, the future is not one set path, rather a number of possible outcomes. Perhaps we simply got lucky -- it's rude to come in after the fact and say I told you so.
"Now you see that evil will always triumph, because good is dumb."
-Dark Helmet.
midnight-gamer
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 345
Joined: Thu 01 Sep 2005, 02:00:00
Location: New Hampshire USA

Re: Peak Oil.. Who are you to say?

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Sun 01 Oct 2017, 01:12:51

"Fracking, an emergent technology, came out of left field, from a bit player I might add." Huh? Frac'ng has been going on for more then 60 years. More the 1 million frac jobs have been done in the US alone. I would hardly classify it as an "emergent technology". The Rockman did his first big frac job (a half million pounds) in 1979 in a carbonate shale in Texas. And by a bit player? I wouldn't call one of the largest global service companies, Halliburton, a bit player. Now frac'ng horizontal wells is relatively new but we were doing that in the 1990's.

Again what made the shales boom was the high price of oil that justified a surge of proven technologies: frac'ng and horizontal drilling. The big increase in drilling activity did allow a good bit of tweaking of frac'ng. But essentially the basic method has not changed in many decades: a fluid carrying a high concentration of proppant (typically sand) is pumped out of the well bore under very high pressure into the reservoir. This causes fractures to open up in the rock which the proppant prevents from closing. No different in 2017 then in 1957.

Likewise Rockman's company in 1979 justified that big frac job for the same reason that led to the recent boom: record high oil prices. And BTW if that "bit player" you were referring happens to be George Mitchell he was doing a similar big frac as the Rockman was in the late 1970's. Yes: George had been frac'ng wells decades before the recent boom.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 10671
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: Peak Oil.. Who are you to say?

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Sun 01 Oct 2017, 01:27:24

"The definition of Peak oil is that we have used up half of the oil that the Earth holds." It never ceases to amaze me how some people make up sh*t to fit whatever agenda they are trying promote. Hopefully most here understand the real definition of peak oil so I'm not going to waste time going over it. The ignorant will just have to continue forward with heads firmly planted up their asses. LOL.

And Revi, if I understand you correct!y, you have had difficulty explaining what peak oil represents. Why? Or are you talking about the rediculous efforts of those that try to predict that unimportant date of global peak oil?
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 10671
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: Peak Oil.. Who are you to say?

Unread postby AdamB » Sun 01 Oct 2017, 09:57:59

midnight-gamer wrote:It seems short-sighted to come on here and make blanket statements about who was right and wrong ten + years ago.


Would you prefer 20, when Colin Campbell was declaring peak oils? Or 30 years ago when Jimmy was claiming running out? Or 80 years ago when Hubbert was claiming peak oil in the US by 1950? The point is when do people LEARN from those bad calls, and update their ideas to better reflect what we now know is the reality of peak oil claims...without the peak oil part coming true.

midnight-gamer wrote:To my knowledge, Peakoil.com circa 2005-2008 didn't have a unified opinion about the future -- the predictions were as diverse as the posters themselves.


No they weren't. Daring to say that peak wouldn't happen got folks booted. Go look at those who were, and the ideas they dared to advocate..you know...like MAYBE peak doomer claims wouldn't work out as planned. That's all it took. Now, if you are thinking only of the fast and slow crashers, cannibals versus gold bugs, gardeners and gun collectors, well sure, there was HUGE diversity. But you weren't allow to question the premise. And slow crash meant a couple years, you know, years before NOW, as we sit here in glut and new supply.

It is called herdthink. 2005-2008 was a wonderful example of it.

midnight-gamer wrote: I believe it's reasonable to have concluded that a fast crash was *one* possible outcome based on the available data at that time; Fracking, an emergent technology, came out of left field, from a bit player I might add.


People HERE were talking about fracking back then, it wasn't from out of left field. And those people were banned for daring to know this information. It was only out of left field for the myopic. Or doomers, who want NOTHING to do with highly visible things happening..RIGHT NOW. See my sig line for exactly the next round of change that doomers so desperately want to avoid discussing.

midnight-gamer wrote:Additionally, it seemed just as likely that oil-holding nations might opt to hold onto their reserves rather than selling it even faster.


The Saudi's have SPECIFICALLY chosen the opposite path. Defending market share is there game..and you want to know what they are afraid of? Watch Tony Seba's video in my sig line. Quaking in their boots, they should be.

midnight-gamer wrote:If posters here are to make unbiased predictions, then their arguments ought to build on truth and be careful not to misrepresent that truth. Finally, the future is not one set path, rather a number of possible outcomes. Perhaps we simply got lucky -- it's rude to come in after the fact and say I told you so.


It isn't about rude, it is about LEARNING. Doomers are proving they can't, even when faced with their bad calls. Science is all about learning from experiments, doomers can see the results of their ideas playing out in the real world around them, and you know they can't learn when they just repeat the same mantra, and hope that this time it works out, rather than learning WHY it didn't work out last time, and adjust their dogma accordingly.
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 3384
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

Re: Peak Oil.. Who are you to say?

Unread postby AdamB » Sun 01 Oct 2017, 10:10:43

ROCKMAN wrote:"The definition of Peak oil is that we have used up half of the oil that the Earth holds." It never ceases to amaze me how some people make up sh*t to fit whatever agenda they are trying promote. Hopefully most here understand the real definition of peak oil so I'm not going to waste time going over it. The ignorant will just have to continue forward with heads firmly planted up their asses. LOL.


You aren't going to overcome the ingrained propaganda among the faithful Rockman, no matter how many times you point it out.

Rockman wrote:And Revi, if I understand you correct!y, you have had difficulty explaining what peak oil represents. Why? Or are you talking about the rediculous efforts of those that try to predict that unimportant date of global peak oil?


the date isn't unimportant Rockman. No different than harold camping, to keep the attention of the faithful you just don't waffle around the blessed event..it has to be near enough to scare folks your way, convert them to your beliefs. So they MUST have a date, otherwise there is no point to the missionary work.
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 3384
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

Re: Peak Oil.. Who are you to say?

Unread postby pstarr » Sun 01 Oct 2017, 12:34:28

ROCKMAN wrote:"The definition of Peak oil is that we have used up half of the oil that the Earth holds." It never ceases to amaze me how some people make up sh*t to fit whatever agenda they are trying promote. Hopefully most here understand the real definition of peak oil so I'm not going to waste time going over it. The ignorant will just have to continue forward with heads firmly planted up their asses. LOL.

And the arrogant will do the same. It's easy to attack people and ideas out of context and come off sounding smart.
Recovery factor during the primary recovery stage is typically 5-15%.[2]

On average, the recovery factor after primary and secondary oil recovery operations is between 35 and 45%.[2]

Tertiary recovery allows another 5% to 15% of the reservoir's oil to be recovered.[2]

Sounds about right. And least we forget . . . that tertiary recovery program is basically now really tight-shale and ultra-deepwater . . . both ABOUT DONE AND FINISHED. The kid was right 12 years ago, and we are still arguing about placement of deck chairs on the Titanic. :x

BTW anybody want to argue that hydrolic fracting is not tertiary, ie depleted end-of-field technology? Go for it lol
Haven't you heard? I'm a doomer!
pstarr
NeoMaster
NeoMaster
 
Posts: 26543
Joined: Mon 27 Sep 2004, 02:00:00
Location: Behind the Redwood Curtain

Re: Peak Oil.. Who are you to say?

Unread postby asg70 » Sun 01 Oct 2017, 13:31:48

pstarr wrote:ABOUT DONE AND FINISHED


Prove it.
“Hate, it has caused a lot of problems in the world, but has not solved one yet.” --Maya Angelou
asg70
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 1298
Joined: Sun 05 Feb 2017, 13:17:28

Re: Peak Oil.. Who are you to say?

Unread postby pstarr » Sun 01 Oct 2017, 13:42:42

asg70 wrote:
pstarr wrote:ABOUT DONE AND FINISHED


Prove it.

I just did , you moron.
Haven't you heard? I'm a doomer!
pstarr
NeoMaster
NeoMaster
 
Posts: 26543
Joined: Mon 27 Sep 2004, 02:00:00
Location: Behind the Redwood Curtain

Re: Peak Oil.. Who are you to say?

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Sun 01 Oct 2017, 15:06:57

pstarr - "...anybody want to argue that hydrolic fracting is not tertiary, ie depleted end-of-field technology? Go for it".

OK, easily done: can you or anyone else name a single field where frac'ng was done near the end of its productive life? Even if one had just a very rudimentary understanding of reservoir engineering they would immedistely recognize the absurdity of that statement. IOW frac'ng is typically done before a field actually starts producing. Can't get much more primary production then that.

As far as recoveries goes the vast majority of conventional oil fields that the Rockman has developed ultimately recovered 30% to as high as 50% during their primary recovery phase. I suspect the confusion comes from typically only reservoirs with low recoveries have EOR methods applied to them. But of course not every reservoir with low recoveries has an economic EOR method that can be applied.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 10671
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: Peak Oil.. Who are you to say?

Unread postby asg70 » Sun 01 Oct 2017, 15:28:39

pstarr wrote:
asg70 wrote:
pstarr wrote:ABOUT DONE AND FINISHED


Prove it.

I just did , you moron.



What, by going all caps? That doesn't prove anything. Oh, btw, flagged.
“Hate, it has caused a lot of problems in the world, but has not solved one yet.” --Maya Angelou
asg70
Light Sweet Crude
Light Sweet Crude
 
Posts: 1298
Joined: Sun 05 Feb 2017, 13:17:28

Re: Peak Oil.. Who are you to say?

Unread postby pstarr » Sun 01 Oct 2017, 16:34:34

ROCKMAN wrote:OK, easily done: can you or anyone else name a single field where frac'ng was done near the end of its productive life?

I can. Call me [smilie=adios.gif] Hey teach! How about the Permian?
Permania: 100 Years In The Permian Oil Fields Of Texas And New ...
From Rigzone:
The primary producing rock types are limestone, dolomite and sandstone that have high porosities. But advances in horizontal drilling and hydraulic fracturing have expanded production into unconventional, tight oil shales such as those found in the Wolfcamp formation.
You are always dissing 'unconventional' as some kind of unnecessary or meaningless word. But not here. Here it means tertiary, end of the line, no-profit business.

From Rigzone:
Primary oil recovery is limited to hydrocarbons that naturally rise to the surface, or those that use artificial lift devices, such as pump jacks.

Tight-shale oil is NOT produced under primary production methods. Because it doesn't just rise to the surface by itself. It is trapped in source rock and never migrated to a trap.
From Rigzone:
While waterflooding and gas injection during the secondary recovery method are used to push the oil through the well, EOR applies steam or gas to change the makeup of the reservoir.

It's NOT even secondary. It's more than waterflooding. Tight shale needs 1 millions barrels of water injected under high pressure. Not really water flooding, not secondary. I'd have to call it 'waterbombing'. Does water enema work? :? 8)
From Rigzone:
Used in fields that exhibit heavy oil, poor permeability and irregular faultlines, EOR entails changing the actual properties of the hydrocarbons, which further distinguishes this phase of recovery from the secondary recovery method.

Cracking rocks with nitroglycerin or water bombs and adding agar-agar and weird chemicals to the reservoir is pretty extreme. Definately is a tertiary method.

ROCKMAN wrote:As far as recoveries goes the vast majority of conventional oil fields that the Rockman has developed ultimately recovered 30% to as high as 50% during their primary recovery phase. I suspect the confusion comes from typically only reservoirs with low recoveries have EOR methods applied to them. But of course not every reservoir with low recoveries has an economic EOR method that can be applied.

I hear you. And feel for you But these are not conventional times.

ROCKMAN wrote:Even if one had just a very rudimentary understanding of reservoir engineering they would immedistely recognize the absurdity of that statement. IOW frac'ng is typically done before a field actually starts producing. Can't get much more primary production then that.
The ENTIRE RESERVOIR undergoes treatment . . . before it is produced. It is all blowed up, diluted with surfactants and made slippery with agar. That would be least tertiary, perhaps even quaternary' or mabye septenary
Haven't you heard? I'm a doomer!
pstarr
NeoMaster
NeoMaster
 
Posts: 26543
Joined: Mon 27 Sep 2004, 02:00:00
Location: Behind the Redwood Curtain

Re: Peak Oil.. Who are you to say?

Unread postby AdamB » Sun 01 Oct 2017, 20:53:38

pstarr wrote:
asg70 wrote:
pstarr wrote:ABOUT DONE AND FINISHED


Prove it.

I just did , you moron.


No, you didn't. Only a moron would think they had.
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 3384
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

Re: Peak Oil.. Who are you to say?

Unread postby pstarr » Sun 01 Oct 2017, 21:04:08

AdamB wrote:
pstarr wrote:
asg70 wrote:
pstarr wrote:ABOUT DONE AND FINISHED


Prove it.

I just did , you moron.


No, you didn't. Only a moron would think they had.

How about it? Care to discuss tertiary production methods as applied to tight-shale?
Haven't you heard? I'm a doomer!
pstarr
NeoMaster
NeoMaster
 
Posts: 26543
Joined: Mon 27 Sep 2004, 02:00:00
Location: Behind the Redwood Curtain

Re: Peak Oil.. Who are you to say?

Unread postby AdamB » Sun 01 Oct 2017, 21:31:38

pstarr wrote:
AdamB wrote:
pstarr wrote:I just did , you moron.


No, you didn't. Only a moron would think they had.

How about it? Care to discuss tertiary production methods as applied to tight-shale?


With Lynn Helms during a hearing in front of the North Dakota Industrial Commission? Sure. With you, who couldn't tell a shale from pumice if I hit you on the head with it? There is no point. Putting aside the fact you know nothing about geology, how in the world can I expect a specialist in spectating at forest clear cutting events to understand the math behind the reservoir dynamics models (say, like even the simple ones like CO2-Prophet). I mean, there is MATH involved, and it isn't a spectator sport, and doesn't involve drinking Budweiser while doing it.
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 3384
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

Re: Peak Oil.. Who are you to say?

Unread postby midnight-gamer » Sun 01 Oct 2017, 22:31:40

ROCKMAN wrote:"Fracking, an emergent technology, came out of left field, from a bit player I might add." Huh? Frac'ng has been going on for more then 60 years. More the 1 million frac jobs have been done in the US alone. I would hardly classify it as an "emergent technology". The Rockman did his first big frac job (a half million pounds) in 1979 in a carbonate shale in Texas. And by a bit player? I wouldn't call one of the largest global service companies, Halliburton, a bit player. Now frac'ng horizontal wells is relatively new but we were doing that in the 1990's.

A decade ago nobody in the media was talking about fracking until everybody was talking about fracking, as is indicated in this article:
Over the past decade, the biggest story in the US energy sector has been hydraulic fracturing, also known as fracking.
what enabled the oil and gas industry to extract oil from shale rock over the past 7 years was higher prices. If it weren’t for higher oil prices, the capital investment needed in the oil and gas sector, wouldn’t have occurred, and US oil production would have continued to decline.
http://oilprice.com/Energy/Crude-Oil/The-Real-History-Of-Fracking.html
Yes, the technology may be old, but it was modified within the past few decades and became prominent after the lead-up in oil prices. As a spectator, I had no idea that things like horizontal fracking existed in 2005.

And BTW if that "bit player" you were referring happens to be George Mitchell he was doing a similar big frac as the Rockman was in the late 1970's. Yes: George had been frac'ng wells decades before the recent boom.
I was referencing him. Although it appears I was mistaken about the scale of Mitchell's contribution. I recalled an article that mentioned his company experiencing financial difficulty in the 90's:
At one point in the late 1990s, his son Todd recalls, Mitchell expressed incredulity that a few upstarts in Silicon Valley could write a software program and sell their company for a billion dollars. That was nearly the value of Mitchell Energy at the time, a company with some 2,000 employees, vast land holdings — and an uncertain future.
https://www.nytimes.com/news/the-lives-they-lived/2013/12/21/george-mitchell/
"Now you see that evil will always triumph, because good is dumb."
-Dark Helmet.
midnight-gamer
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 345
Joined: Thu 01 Sep 2005, 02:00:00
Location: New Hampshire USA

Re: Peak Oil.. Who are you to say?

Unread postby midnight-gamer » Sun 01 Oct 2017, 22:58:35

AdamB wrote:Would you prefer 20, when Colin Campbell was declaring peak oils? Or 30 years ago when Jimmy was claiming running out? Or 80 years ago when Hubbert was claiming peak oil in the US by 1950? The point is when do people LEARN from those bad calls, and update their ideas to better reflect what we now know is the reality of peak oil claims...without the peak oil part coming true.


I'm willing to change my opinions when proven wrong, although I never really had a stance one way or another, it's nice to see that those shouting doom from the roof-tops were incorrect (at least until this moment).

AdamB wrote:No they weren't. Daring to say that peak wouldn't happen got folks booted. Go look at those who were, and the ideas they dared to advocate..you know...like MAYBE peak doomer claims wouldn't work out as planned. That's all it took. Now, if you are thinking only of the fast and slow crashers, cannibals versus gold bugs, gardeners and gun collectors, well sure, there was HUGE diversity. But you weren't allow to question the premise. And slow crash meant a couple years, you know, years before NOW, as we sit here in glut and new supply.

It is called herdthink. 2005-2008 was a wonderful example of it.


I don't remember any specific examples of dissenters being banned, but I agree that silencing the opposition is a poor way to have a discussion. This seems similar to Republicans in their echo chambers when confronted with climate change.

AdamB wrote:People HERE were talking about fracking back then, it wasn't from out of left field. And those people were banned for daring to know this information. It was only out of left field for the myopic. Or doomers, who want NOTHING to do with highly visible things happening..RIGHT NOW. See my sig line for exactly the next round of change that doomers so desperately want to avoid discussing.



Was I mistaken? I can admit being wrong if that's the case.

AdamB wrote:The Saudi's have SPECIFICALLY chosen the opposite path. Defending market share is there game..and you want to know what they are afraid of? Watch Tony Seba's video in my sig line. Quaking in their boots, they should be.


I dislike having a dependence on Saudi oil and I despise giving them Billions of dollars in contracts.


AdamB wrote:It isn't about rude, it is about LEARNING. Doomers are proving they can't, even when faced with their bad calls. Science is all about learning from experiments, doomers can see the results of their ideas playing out in the real world around them, and you know they can't learn when they just repeat the same mantra, and hope that this time it works out, rather than learning WHY it didn't work out last time, and adjust their dogma accordingly.


Anyone who is unwilling to put aside a bias and look at things objectively is bound to have a bad time sooner or later.
"Now you see that evil will always triumph, because good is dumb."
-Dark Helmet.
midnight-gamer
Heavy Crude
Heavy Crude
 
Posts: 345
Joined: Thu 01 Sep 2005, 02:00:00
Location: New Hampshire USA

Re: Peak Oil.. Who are you to say?

Unread postby AdamB » Mon 02 Oct 2017, 15:44:56

midnight-gamer wrote:I don't remember any specific examples of dissenters being banned, but I agree that silencing the opposition is a poor way to have a discussion.


I went and rounded up an old thread last night, started by rocdoc way back when that involved just one such person being banned. Even more interesting, this person was talking about the power of shales to change the world...BEFORE they did. Not the after the fact stuff that people do nowadays, but before the world changed because of it. This was only 1 year after the Hirsch report came out, and a poster right here on this website was pointing out that ole Bobby was missing the boat. A poster for crying out loud, not some academic talking head paid to do this stuff.

midnight-gamer wrote:This seems similar to Republicans in their echo chambers when confronted with climate change.


Zealots is the best description I've seen. It covers the religious folks, diehard political party believers, true believers of almost any stripe really....including doomers. I haven't noticed it here as of late, obviously now any discussion on the topic must include the lower prices and glut brought about by the supply response to price a few years back.


midnight-gamer wrote:
AdamB wrote:The Saudi's have SPECIFICALLY chosen the opposite path. Defending market share is there game..and you want to know what they are afraid of? Watch Tony Seba's video in my sig line. Quaking in their boots, they should be.


I dislike having a dependence on Saudi oil and I despise giving them Billions of dollars in contracts.


Go get an EV. Once upon a time, "Who Killed The Electric Car" was a wonderful example of doomers reaching for failure to demonstrate how and what peak oil would kill when it happened. Then it supposedly happened, and what happened INSTEAD? The Volt and Leaf. Peak oil personal transport solutions. The wife has one, a Ford. It has been about 4 months or so since she has put gasoline in it, I probably should go put some in it for her just to keep the gasoline fresh for the entire winter. She's gone more than 6 months without putting gasoline in it before. Doomers don't talk about EVs much anymore, because they now exist, and there are big changes afoot that are causing exactly the kind of structural change that the Saudi's are scared to death about. Doomers as well. I mean really, how many times in a decade or two would you like most of the world laughing at stupid your basic understanding of resource economics was?

midnight-gamer wrote:
AdamB wrote:It isn't about rude, it is about LEARNING. Doomers are proving they can't, even when faced with their bad calls. Science is all about learning from experiments, doomers can see the results of their ideas playing out in the real world around them, and you know they can't learn when they just repeat the same mantra, and hope that this time it works out, rather than learning WHY it didn't work out last time, and adjust their dogma accordingly.


Anyone who is unwilling to put aside a bias and look at things objectively is bound to have a bad time sooner or later.


Welcome to the evidence of exactly that, still happening every day. Bell shaped curves don't work? Make up regressions and pretend they are predictive! Prices dropped? Must be because EROEI did to! New supply all over the place, and the world to soon crack 100 million barrels a day? Well, its that OTHER oil, so we won't count it even though we put it in our fuel tanks, because, you know, it is a different color! Maybe the specific gravity is different! Bad time is an understatement of the day.
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 3384
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

Re: Peak Oil.. Who are you to say?

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Mon 02 Oct 2017, 16:56:07

anybody want to argue that hydrolic fracting is not tertiary, ie depleted end-of-field technology? Go for it


You are a total dolt pstar. It is one thing to ask a question but to argue a point about something you know nothing about is plain stupid.

The definition of Primary recovery as Rockman pointed out is that hydrocarbons move from the reservoir to the wellbore once a conduit as been provided. In the case of most wells in conventional reservoirs that is simply to remove any wellbore damage created during the drilling process and that is done by either an acid wash or fracking. Yes fracking has been used for decades to clean up well damage. Often this primary recovery requires downhole pumps (progressive cavity pumps or electrical submersible pumps) to lift the hydrocarbons but that too is part of the Primary recovery process. Secondary recovery is where primary has been ineffective and requires injection of water or gas continuously in such a manner that it pushes the oil through the pore space to the wellbore. Tertiary recovery involves three main methods. Thermal involves heating the oil to make it less viscous and capable of flowing, commonly used in heavy oils with high viscosity. Gas injection is different than in the secondary recovery case inasmuch as the gas is totally miscible with the oil making it less viscous and allowing it to flow. In certain cases it can also help turn an oil wet reservoir into a water wet reservoir which will also increase recovery. Chemical injection which is used infrequently basically lowers surface tension of the oil and helps with on going water flood recovery. Shale E&P is nothing like either Secondary or Tertiary recovery. The water and sand injected simply creates a fracture or a conduit from shale pore space to the wellbore. The chemicals added in the frack are there only to enhance the ability to create that fracture they do nothing to the mobility of the oil. Unlike secondary recovery where water or gas are injected continuously pushing the oil in front of the flood the water injected to create a frack is very temporary (several hours at most). Once fracked the shale flows on its own volition (although downhole pumps may be needed but that again is common in primary recovery). The oil is neither “bound” in the pore space nor is it viscous, indeed most of the wells drilled are into zones of lighter oil with high GOR.

In short shale oil/gas E&P is primary recovery based at this point in time. At somepoint there will be attempts to perhaps inject CO2 continuously or some such thing but that is not happening in anything other than experimental fashion at this point in time.
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5595
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 02:00:00

PreviousNext

Return to Peak Oil Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 17 guests