Exploring Hydrocarbon Depletion
NEW! Members Only Forums!
Access more articles, news & discussion by becoming a PeakOil.com Member.
The first graph in that article is at about 4 in 2008, the second graph starts out at 7.5 in Jan 2009. Did production almost double during 2008?Moto wrote:I sort of think we will see a shift in Hubbert's Peak based on new drilling technology. Anyone feel like changing my mind?
Moto wrote:I'm new here, but I'm here to stir the pot a little because I think things are a little too one sided when you are always among like-minded people. I have gone full circle on this topic, and now I'm not exactly sure what I think. I sort of think we will see a shift in Hubbert's Peak based on new drilling technology. Anyone feel like changing my mind?
Moto wrote:I'm not promoting anything. I just want people to think about it. If there is a future for this world it is going to require developing all our resources responsibly.
I am not as kind as others here, I have run out of patience, and so I won't belabor niceties; all evidence suggest you are merely another industry troll. We have lots. Say goodbye.Moto wrote:I basically agree with that. I'm banking on people figuring out that they need to move to other sources. I worry that a government with no energy plan is going to attempt to move too quickly to renewable sources. I'm ok with regulation pushing alternatives, but if they push too hard and ignore resources that we already have they will just create more problems. My goal is just to make people think about what we have.
Moto wrote:I basically agree with that. I'm banking on people figuring out that they need to move to other sources.
You must be referring to tight shale gas, shale oil, oil shale and necessary and very expensive production systems such as THAI, SAGH, and shale horizontal fracturing? Correct?Bruce_S wrote:Moto wrote:I basically agree with that. I'm banking on people figuring out that they need to move to other sources.
They already are. Otherwise Oilfinder wouldn't be so irritating because he wouldn't have so much evidence to refute the common peak oil meme of scarcity. Otherwise we would have had the Natural Gas Cliff in the US in 2005, instead of a glut. Otherwise the slow but steady march of increased reserve volumes from places like Canada and Venezuela would not have happened, and the BP Annual Review would only show dropping reserves with consumption, instead of increasing ones.
The evidence is already here. You certainly don't need anything more than recent history to prove it, and certainly Hubbert doesn't need to get involved in the least.
Moto wrote:Renewable energy is ideal, but is not realistic in the near future. I have crunched the numbers and it just is not going to happen any time soon.
I have the levelized costs of natural gas, coal, wind, etc:Moto wrote:I plan to cover other energy sources. I just didn’t have time find the numbers. I am less familiar with natural gas and coal in terms of energy production and life span.
Ouch. That seems like a rather extreme position to take. I would gather from that statement that you work in the energy industry and your company has tangled with environmental groups in the past? I for one have real concerns that the water I drink and the air I breath are clean. But I want to give you a fair shake, and you did ask for specific questions, so can you point out something specific about how the environmental groups are full of crap?Moto wrote:Most environmental groups are full of crap, are typically uninformed, and get in the way of progress for everyone. It is hard to fix problems when someone puts the breaks on before you even get started. It is important to make mistakes that are worth making. I liken most environmental groups to ambulance chasing lawyers and they typically cause more damage than good.
Pops wrote:strictly about volume maybe, but we aren't even keeping up with past increases so far.
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests