meemoe_uk wrote:Great eh? Nice to live in an oil and CO2 cornucopian society i think, just as the cornies said we would.
in 05 the head corny Yergin said we could produce over 100 million barrels a day by 2010; a 20% increase in 6 years. Then in 06 his partner said a 20% increase in 9 years, and last year Yergin said a 20% increase in 20 years. Since 05 we've increased from 85 to 91 Mbd: 1%/yr. Finally he seems to have come to grips with past reality, his forecasts are rapidly depleting, wonder what his next will be?
I addressed this in recent post
meemoe wrote:doomer method to discredit skeptics and cornys:
step 1 : cherry pick a skeptic prediction that's gone wrong
step 2 : extrapolate from that one prediction from one corny and insinuate that all cornies make wrong predictions all of the time and that the general corny hypothesis ( plenty of oil , no energy crisis ) is wrong.
step 3 : add in a complete lie ( " World oil production has been flat since 2005. " )
step 4 : repeat steps 1~4, for hundreds of years, regardless of any data to the contrary. ( e.g. the IEA or EIA data )
Thanks for following my method on how to discredit skeptics.
I don't follow or respect Yergin's outlook.
The failure of Yergins prediction doesn't falsify the general cornucopian prediction - " plenty of oil for hundreds of years, no peak any time soon, no horrible crash when oil peaks "
So far all these predictions are holding out just fine.
In the period that all liquids production has been barely increasing 1%/yr, price has been increasing 20%/yr (?). Does that really imply a cornucopian surplus to you?
The same type of argument could be shot at the 1970s hike in oil prices. As it turned out the 1970s oil price rises were due more to the maxing of oil production capacity at the time, the need for massive funding for new oil infrastructure, and political upheaval. It wasn't due to a geological limit being reached. After the 1970s came 80s 90s and 2000s all with plenty more oil.
There's no reason to doubt that exactly the same thing is happening now as in the 1970s crisis.
So yes it does imply a Copernican surplus to me, for 30 years to come as well.
Doomers and peakers have no interest in peak oil. They are only interested in doom.
And you are interested in what? Poking PO doomers in the eye? You obviously are interested in peak oil at least as much as any admitted
peaker. If you were uninterested you'd not be here, just like all the other uninterested people are not here. If PO is a non-event why waste your time on a bunch of doomers? Do you frequent Chupacabra sites to disprove the Chupacabra Doomers?
'fraid so. I've a commitment to the truth, that is to point it out to people who are wrong.
Peakers have been insisting TEOTWAWKI is imminent for decades, well if they had right any time in the past, it should have happened by now. It hasn't. But there's always some scare and hype story in the media to be interpreted as ' the first crack in the dam ' to keep the myth alive. When oil production figures say everything's ok, doomers have gone elsewhere for their PO doom. I think is only sensible and reasonable to keep peakers attached to their base postulate - immiment PO will cause doom - by pointing out the data doesn't agree with the hypothesis.
The only reason I can think you come here is that peak oil scares the crap out of you and as long as you can say nanananana you don't need to consider your fear or your vulnerability.
It doesn't scare me because I know its not true.
That's all right, you posting the latest "oil" production figure when they suit your argument proves or disproves nothing – just as the fact that last month's decline and essentially flat first quarter production
Are you going to weigh in on this with your PO is now conviction?
This is what peakers used to do here 5 years ago.
They'd find the peak in the data, and assert that it was the all time peak.
So now we have record oil production back in April 2012.
The problem this original peaker game was the record kept getting broken, and peakers got wise to it. For many, this broke the whole game. The peakers left are somehow ok with believing peak oil is now but at the same time don't have the confidence to call any high point THE peak. The only way I can wrap my brain round that is to think you are deluding yourselves.
Since it became clear the record oil production was going to keep getting broken, the job of a POer was to create alternative goal posts, such as oil production only counts if its 1970s technology production, and a certain grade of oil, with a certain minimal EROEI, or a oil production divided by world population.
I'm just here to remind you of the original assertion -peak oil is now. Not any of these other peaks in other measures. - at a record price - (which you and OF2, et al conveniently forgot to post) likewise proves nothing. Earlywarning:
I've already posted my thoughts on oil prices. Oil is dirt cheap at $120 a barrel.
The point of peak oil is that production will rise, 'till it falls or stalls and can't get up. A month or a quarter or a year is noise on a 200-300 year curve. Your Gish gallop reflects the flimsiness of your denial.
We've now got 7 years past 2005 which was the favorite year for the 1st internet forum generation of peakers. If we had a graph of oil production to year 2305 and we could see a peak at 2012 then this arguement of being just a small bit off would be valid.
But we don't.
By the best error margin we've got, peak oil being roughly 2005 is wrong, and every month year and decade of new record highs is strengthening that falsification.
The fundamental longer term trends are that new discovery has slowed to a crawl,
This is totally false. OF2 threads and posts assert from oil companies that much more oil than we've consumed to date has been discovered. Discovery hasn't slowed to a crawl, its rocketed into the cosmos.
conventional reservoir production has plateaued or very near,
Yesterdays convention always peaks yesterday. A well drilled today will on average employ better technology than the one drilled the year before. This truth has never caused the PO doom dieoff with the peaking of old conventions, and it won't for the present or future conventions. Conventions don't matter. But I see conventions are now a immovable staple diet of one wing of the PO religion, they'll still be singing about some old oil convention peaking 100 years from now.
long term real prices average higher than at any time in history,
Nah, The cost was higher in 2008. At short times in the 1970s oil broke the markets, you couldn't buy it for any price.
dirty coal usage is increasing at twice the rate of any other fossil fuels and though "New" oil and EOR is all the rage in the investor-fleecing and whistling past the graveyard it isn't new and isn't a replacement.
So what? Are you saying the only reason for increasing coal production is because oil is about to peak? That's absurd. A growing world industrial society is bound to increase coal production, regardless of oil.