It's official: New monthly world crude oil production record

[vtsnowedin]

I'm glad you cleared that up for us Meemo. What with all the things that have gone on in the last hundred days:Japan, Egypt, Libya Yemen, Bahrain, the US budget crisis among others I was getting a little worried there. Good to know we will be awash in cheap oil while we clean up these soon to be minor inconveniences.

[bratticus]

EIA Table

Crude & Condensate:
July 2008: 74,669.571 bpd
Dec. 2010: 74,795.725 bpd

But the year is still just shy of 2005:

2005: 73,712 bpd

Crude & Condensate & tap water & anything else we can think of.

Dude, if I showed you a chart of "Copper & Mercury production" with dropping copper production rates and increasing mercury production would that mean there was more copper being produced? Yet combining Crude & Condensate is supposed to be proof of more crude production. What utter nonsense.

[meemoe_uk]

In misty sureal land of Vts, you can't solve 1 problem if another problem exists.
Like if the washing up and the ironing both need doing, your screwed, you can't do either.

hahar, what a crap excuse Vts. But, don't worry, a lot of peakers use that line of nonsense - there's more than one problem in the world, therefore no problem can be solved. In the meantime, don't even try and get out of bed in a morning because you'll need to at least get dressed AND go to the bathroom. Bummer. Your screwed.
But at least you can always argue with people who point out solutions or good news. Just point out something that has nothing to do with the solved problem, and that amounts to the problem being unsolved.
You must be a happy doomer, knowing your safe under this 'protect from any solution to any problem' umbrella of doomer nonsense.

BTW, how you getting on blocking out this other part of reality I pointed out to you 3 months ago?
http://www.powerswitch.org.uk/forum/vie ... c&start=75
Your marble analogy and my improvement. Thought of nonsense reply yet? Hint : you could always use the fact that there's serious shortage of sheep on mars. Remember, one unsolved problem always refutes any solution to any other unrelated problem.

I think you've won the title of dummest global warming skeptic ( 50% of AGW skeptics are just AGWers that have chosen the wrong side by accident ).

[bratticus]

EIA Table

Crude & Condensate:
July 2008: 74,669.571 bpd
Dec. 2010: 74,795.725 bpd

But the year is still just shy of 2005:

2005: 73,712 bpd

Crude & Condensate & tap water & anything else we can think of.

Dude, if I showed you a chart of "Copper & Mercury production" with dropping copper production rates and increasing mercury production would that mean there was more copper being produced? Yet combining Crude & Condensate is supposed to be proof of more crude production. What utter nonsense.

WOO-HOO! We are producing more Oil plus Non-Oil (which doesn't have the properties of crude oil especially the energy density) combined! We have proven that you can call natural gas oil!

[meemoe_uk]

Crude & Condensate & tap water & anything else we can think of.

Dude, if I showed you a chart of "Copper & Mercury production" with dropping copper production rates and increasing mercury production would that mean there was more copper being produced? Yet combining Crude & Condensate is supposed to be proof of more crude production. What utter nonsense.

OMG, here we go again. They're having another dummest doomer excuse for ignoring all evidence contrary to the PeakOilDoomIsNow religion.
Vts, and braticus have got there entries in. Any other entries? AirlinePilot? Your not gonna let these noobs beat you at your own game are you?

Let's give this latest entry by braticus the attention it deserves.
Condensate is not oil. Get that? Braticus says so.
Take some oil. Evaporate it. What you got? Evaporated Oil? Erm no. According to Braticus now it's something else. Something spooky and surreal?
In reality, It's just oil. The only difference is that the oil molecules aren't bound together in a liquid, they're free bouncing around as a gas. And they can be returned to liquid state by cooling it or pressurizing it.

Anyway lets have some fun with braticus new rule.
Got some water? Boil it, then then condense it again. What you got? Water? No! Cos by braticus' rule it's not water!
Got some molecules stuck together on the ground? Disperse them into the air, then gather them up again. Same group of molecules? No says braticus!
Got a ball on the ground? Throw it in the air. It comes back down to rest on the ground. Same ball? No! because it was a 'condensate' ball when it was in the air. And as we all know from braticus, condensates can't be returned to their solid\liquid form. Just like materials such as mecury, copper or tap water can't be turned into oil.
Jump in the air. Are you you? No you've jumped in the air! By braticus rule, you're someone else now. Pleased to meet yourself. Whats your name?

Jeezuz. That's the great fun thing about being a doomer. There is no lower limit. No amount of nonsense is idiot enough.
Dismissing oil in a gasous form as not oil, water in cloud form as not water etc, is only one more step in a long continuum of ever more absurd absurditys. Keep going! We're all watching. And laughing.

[bratticus]

EIA Table

Crude & Condensate:
July 2008: 74,669.571 bpd
Dec. 2010: 74,795.725 bpd

But the year is still just shy of 2005:

2005: 73,712 bpd

Crude & Condensate & tap water & anything else we can think of.

Dude, if I showed you a chart of "Copper & Mercury production" with dropping copper production rates and increasing mercury production would that mean there was more copper being produced? Yet combining Crude & Condensate is supposed to be proof of more crude production. What utter nonsense.

WOO-HOO! We are producing more Oil plus Non-Oil (which doesn't have the properties of crude oil especially the energy density) combined! We have proven that you can call natural gas oil!

How to make Fool's Oil[tm]

1. take natural gas derived oil, call it "condensates" to confuse people about it only being natural gas.

2. make sure you don't report on BTUs, only on barrels because if you showed the BTUs you wouldn't be fooling anyone after all "energy density" is too complicated for fools.

3. combine it with real crude oil and report not on BTUs but on volume since it's like putting soy meat filler into meat to make it look bigger not actually be more meat. Fools love to eat it because you told them it was hamburger.

4. show them charts of Fool's Oil and how much there is now.

[dolanbaker]

A quick question about these headline "record" figures, What is the breakdown by type of oil that make up this grand total?

By type I mean, just how much of this production is the "cheap -n- easy" stuff and how much is the "unconventional -n- expensive/hard to extract" stuff.

I expect that the ratio has shifted towards the hard & expensive stuff since the previous highs in 2005.

[meemoe_uk]

Crude & Condensate & tap water & anything else we can think of.

Dude, if I showed you a chart of "Copper & Mercury production" with dropping copper production rates and increasing mercury production would that mean there was more copper being produced? Yet combining Crude & Condensate is supposed to be proof of more crude production. What utter nonsense.

OMG, here we go again. They're having another dummest doomer excuse for ignoring all evidence contrary to the PeakOilDoomIsNow religion.
Vts, and braticus have got there entries in. Any other entries? AirlinePilot? Your not gonna let these noobs beat you at your own game are you?

Let's give this latest entry by braticus the attention it deserves.
Condensate is not oil. Get that? Braticus says so.
Take some oil. Evaporate it. What you got? Evaporated Oil? Erm no. According to Braticus now it's something else. Something spooky and surreal?
In reality, It's just oil. The only difference is that the oil molecules aren't bound together in a liquid, they're free bouncing around as a gas. And they can be returned to liquid state by cooling it or pressurizing it.

Anyway lets have some fun with braticus new rule.
Got some water? Boil it, then then condense it again. What you got? Water? No! Cos by braticus' rule it's not water!
Got some molecules stuck together on the ground? Disperse them into the air, then gather them up again. Same group of molecules? No says braticus!
Got a ball on the ground? Throw it in the air. It comes back down to rest on the ground. Same ball? No! because it was a 'condensate' ball when it was in the air. And as we all know from braticus, condensates can't be returned to their solid\liquid form. Just like materials such as mecury, copper or tap water can't be turned into oil.
Jump in the air. Are you you? No you've jumped in the air! By braticus rule, you're someone else now. Pleased to meet yourself. Whats your name?

Jeezuz. That's the great fun thing about being a doomer. There is no lower limit. No amount of nonsense is idiot enough.
Dismissing oil in a gasous form as not oil, water in cloud form as not water etc, is only one more step in a long continuum of ever more absurd absurditys. Keep going! We're all watching. And laughing.

How to make doomer lack of oil amidst plentiful oil
1. Incrementally attack standards for fossil fuel that doomers have accepted for decades
2. Only attack this standard AFTER the desired peak date. e.g. if evaporated oil is suddenly an excuse to not call it oil, only strike out condesates after desired peak date.
3. Quietly stuff the pre-peak oil era with every oil substitute you can find.
4. Mix ingredients 2,3 carely to make the ideal hubbert curve.
5. As a goofy doomer kid, take authority over the worlds oil geologists engineers scientists and denouce their oil reports, such as EIA and IEA.
6. Only do 5 if their charts go up.

Hey presto! perfect doom cake every time!

[meemoe_uk]

>A quick question about these headline "record" figures, What is the breakdown by type of oil that make up this grand total?
Beyound distinguishing between oil and natural gas conversion to liquids, the EIA table doesn't say much in this respect. Therefore doomers are pretty free to speculate that it's all very expensive oil now.

Also, as of today, it seems doomers are free to say that evaporated oil is natural gas.
But unfortunately, if braticus rule is the standard, they are no longer free to recognise international standards that have been set for decades on the line drawn between natural gas hydrocarbons and oil hydrocarbons. Now it seems doomers these days have to believe the EIA includes natural gas in it's oil crude+condensate supply figures!
If your brain allows it, you might wonder why the EIA has seperate tables for natural gas to liquids, when according to braticus, they've already included natural gas to liquids in the oil and condensate figures.
Hmm, I think that's one query our resident analyst braticus won't be sending to the EIA anytime soon.

[Cloud9]

Higher prices will bring on marginal fields invcreasing over all production for a period of time. The raised cost of recovery is included in the higher price. At some point we reach demand destruction.

[Pops]

What is the breakdown by type of oil that make up this grand total?

I think this is what you're looking for:



Not sure how factual it is or even how old, I've seen it around at least a year or more. In fact the WSJ recently said the Mid-East countries nee $95/bbl oil now in order to keep their citizens placated - a whole new wrinkle, no?

.

[pstarr]

No pop, your chart is useful and would help to explain to a "skeptic" like meemiei'mnotokay how different classes of crude reveal different pricing structures, energy returns etc. But that is not the question.

I believer dolanbaker is asking what percent of total liquids, in aggregate, across all regions, etc., was originally derived from natural gas. I doubt it is measured, as the equipment to condense out the a condensate from the gas and introduce it into the liquid pipeline would happen in the field, long before the accounts had their way.

[pstarr]

meemie, you've been here 4 years now. Have your always been this shrill?

[OilFinder2]

ATTENION BRATTICUS: Condensate has ALWAYS been included in the EIA's (and everyone else's) "crude oil" production figures. That bumpy plateau everyone here keeps talking about has ALWAYS included condensate.

Thank you, have a nice day, and please pay attention to stuff like this in the future.

[OilFinder2]

And here's the latest chart:

[Plantagenet]

..here's the latest chart:

Sure looks like a bumpy plateau to me----thats exactly what peak oil theory suggests should occur at the global oil production peak-----it fits perfectly with the idea that oil production peaked in 2005 and the current run up in price reflects tightening of global supply again.

[OilFinder2]

But ... but ... we were supposed to be down to, like, 67 million bpd by now!


LINK

[Plantagenet]

But ... but ... we were supposed to be down to, like, 67 million bpd by now!

In your fantasy world, maybe.

[dolanbaker]

What is the breakdown by type of oil that make up this grand total?

I think this is what you're looking for:



Not sure how factual it is or even how old, I've seen it around at least a year or more. In fact the WSJ recently said the Mid-East countries nee $95/bbl oil now in order to keep their citizens placated - a whole new wrinkle, no?

.

Yes, that is the chart I was alluding to when I asked the question, I suspect that the vertical bars have shifted to the left a bit, as in the percentages of the cheaper stuff is smaller as well as the scale on the Y axis being higher.

[OilFinder2]

But ... but ... we were supposed to be down to, like, 67 million bpd by now!

In your fantasy world, maybe.

LOL! That wasn't my fantasy world, that was the fantasy world of a prominent peaker on TOD - and fantasy world that most peakers at the time actually believed.