Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

THE International Energy Agency (IEA) pt 2

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

Re: I.E.A. states we have 9 trillion barrels left

Unread postby shortonsense » Fri 19 Feb 2010, 20:14:18

TonyPrep wrote:
shortonsense wrote:What if the company invested 3 barrel equivalents of natural gas energy to get 2 barrels of oil out? They could make money.
Of course it would make sense to the energy company. It makes no sense to anyone else (except you and the cornies), unless that gas is stranded.

From the climate perspective, it makes no sense at all.


I think you missed the point on this one Tony.
User avatar
shortonsense
permanently banned
 
Posts: 3124
Joined: Sat 30 Aug 2008, 02:00:00

Re: I.E.A. states we have 9 trillion barrels left

Unread postby TonyPrep » Sat 20 Feb 2010, 03:22:41

shortonsense wrote:
TonyPrep wrote:
shortonsense wrote:What if the company invested 3 barrel equivalents of natural gas energy to get 2 barrels of oil out? They could make money.
Of course it would make sense to the energy company. It makes no sense to anyone else (except you and the cornies), unless that gas is stranded.

From the climate perspective, it makes no sense at all.


I think you missed the point on this one Tony.
How so?

I agree that an energy producing company will always consider the bottom line when making energy development decisions. But it still doesn't make good energy sense to put more energy into producing energy than the energy so produced, even if the company is making a profit in so doing. Of course, there will be occasions when the energy input, or a large part of it, is energy that can't be easily used for useful work elsewhere in society but can be usefully employed in producing a more useful form of energy, even if energy is lost. So, in some cases, it makes sense, but for society, generally, to put more energy into producing the energy it consumes, is not wise and not sustainable.

In terms of the climate, using an energy source that produces greenhouse gases when consumed, to produce an energy source that produces greenhouse gases when consumed is a double climate whammy, and bad news whatever the profit to the producing company is.
User avatar
TonyPrep
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 2821
Joined: Sun 25 Sep 2005, 02:00:00
Location: Waiuku, New Zealand

Re: I.E.A. states we have 9 trillion barrels left

Unread postby shortonsense » Sat 20 Feb 2010, 10:42:27

TonyPrep wrote:
shortonsense wrote:
TonyPrep wrote:
shortonsense wrote:What if the company invested 3 barrel equivalents of natural gas energy to get 2 barrels of oil out? They could make money.
Of course it would make sense to the energy company. It makes no sense to anyone else (except you and the cornies), unless that gas is stranded.

From the climate perspective, it makes no sense at all.


I think you missed the point on this one Tony.
How so?


The natural gas being stranded, or not, is irrelevant.

TonyPrep wrote:I agree that an energy producing company will always consider the bottom line when making energy development decisions. But it still doesn't make good energy sense to put more energy into producing energy than the energy so produced, even if the company is making a profit in so doing.


Tony, you appear to be teetering on the edge of EROEI heresy, and all because you are coming close to noticing the obvious.... "it still doesn't make good energy sense".......THATS the way to say it. Because it immediately follows what is obvious....companies don't make the decision based on good energy sense, they make decisions based on good economic sense. And its why EROEI is a standing joke in a system which measures value in $$.

TonyPrep wrote:In terms of the climate, using an energy source that produces greenhouse gases when consumed, to produce an energy source that produces greenhouse gases when consumed is a double climate whammy, and bad news whatever the profit to the producing company is.


Well, I suppose I'd worry about climate double whammys the instant the computer modelers can satisfy the science requirements of the geologists, until then, its near impossible to decide what the value, or cost, of a climate double whammy even is.
User avatar
shortonsense
permanently banned
 
Posts: 3124
Joined: Sat 30 Aug 2008, 02:00:00

Re: I.E.A. states we have 9 trillion barrels left

Unread postby SeaGypsy » Sat 20 Feb 2010, 11:08:06

TonyPrep wrote:So, in some cases, it makes sense, but for society, generally, to put more energy into producing the energy it consumes, is not wise and not sustainable.


Currently almost nothing society does is wise let alone sustainable. Society has to live long enough to achieve these; something which is not likely under a 'leave it in the ground' philosophy. Whether humanity outlives society and whether the likleyhood is decreased by AGW factors is another question.
SeaGypsy
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 8980
Joined: Wed 04 Feb 2009, 03:00:00

Re: THE International Energy Agency (IEA) pt 2

Unread postby Tanada » Mon 26 Dec 2016, 21:45:03

The 2016 World Energy Outlook prepared by the International Energy Agency was introduced yesterday at a meeting organized by Sabancı University Istanbul International Energy and Climate Center.

Speaking at the introductory meeting of the International Energy Agency (IEA), Executive Director Dr. Fatih Birol said the most serious growth in the energy sector will occur in the field of renewable energy in the next 25 years. He added that as of last month, the Middle Eastern countries have reached the highest level over the last 40 years with a share of 35 percent in the world's oil production.

Birol noted that rock gas and oil have had major impacts on economic and geopolitical developments in the world and that serious developments are expected in liquefied natural gas (LNG) in the coming years.

Suggesting that last year was the year of records for renewable energy, Birol stressed that more than 50 percent of newly established power plants in the world were made up of renewable energy sources in 2015.

Recalling that the biggest contribution to the world's total energy consumption has come from coal over the past 25 years, Birol said growth in coal will slow down significantly in the next 25 years, the demand in petroleum will grow slower than in the past, the most serious growth will come from renewable and nuclear energy, known as clean technologies, and in the next 25 years, renewable energy will lead the way in growth within the framework of existing policies.

US oil import will

go down to zero

Explaining the U.S. is now an oil importing country, Birol said U.S. oil imports will go down to zero almost within 10-15 years, which will affect not only oil markets, but many other areas as well, according to their estimates, and oil production will increase significantly in the U.S. especially with the new administration.

Birol suggested that they expect a very volatile period in the oil markets, stressing that the lack of current investments can create serious problems in a few years, and the number of new oil investment projects in 2015 and 2016 have maintained the lowest levels since 1950. "The number of newly discovered oil fields in 2016 is the lowest of the last 40 years. In that respect, if the demand for the next two-three years continues to grow at a rate of 1 million barrels per day, as in the current situation, the world oil markets may face major problems," Birol added.


http://www.dailysabah.com/energy/2016/1 ... gy-outlook
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 13914
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: THE International Energy Agency (IEA) pt 2

Unread postby salinsky » Tue 27 Dec 2016, 00:30:19

Tanada, I sent you a PM on 12/16 and still have not received a response. Perhaps you could take a look at the PM situation.
Thanks, SAL
If you believe something is true, then it must be true or you wouldn't believe it was true, therefore, everything you think is true, is true, or is it?
Señor Salinsky

A people's culture is their best ignorance.
SAL
User avatar
salinsky
Tar Sands
Tar Sands
 
Posts: 101
Joined: Sat 13 Dec 2014, 19:05:04

Re: THE International Energy Agency (IEA) pt 2

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Tue 27 Dec 2016, 12:02:19

Can always count on Fatih for a good laugh:

"Explaining the U.S. is now an oil importing country...;" Which is has been for about half a century, Dr. Obvious.

"U.S. oil imports will go down to zero almost within 10-15 years...". Of course it will. Oil prices falling 50% will certainly drive US demand down. It's not liklikke we like driving very much. LOL.

"...and oil production will increase significantly in the U.S. especially with the new administration." How could it not with 70% fewer rigs drilling, many tens of $BILLIONS in capex spending cancelled. How couild the current decline in US production not reverse itself shortly?

With such leadership at the IEA how could we doubt any of its forecasts?
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 10547
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: THE International Energy Agency (IEA) pt 2

Unread postby Tanada » Fri 11 Aug 2017, 09:53:44

IEA sees the end of the glut in sight.

LONDON (Reuters) - World oil demand will grow more than expected this year, helping to ease a global glut despite rising production from North America and weak OPEC compliance with output cuts, the International Energy Agency said on Friday.

The agency raised its 2017 demand growth forecast to 1.5 million barrels per day (bpd) from 1.4 million bpd in its previous monthly report and said it expected demand to expand by a further 1.4 million bpd next year.

"Producers should find encouragement from demand, which is growing year-on-year more strongly than first thought," said the Paris-based IEA, which advises industrialized nations on energy policy.

"There would be more confidence that rebalancing is here to stay if some producers party to the output agreements were not, just as they are gaining the upper hand, showing signs of weakening their resolve," the IEA said.

The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries is curbing output by about 1.2 million bpd, while Russia and other non-OPEC producers are cutting a further 600,000 bpd until March 2018 to help support oil prices.

The IEA said OPEC's compliance with the cuts in July had fallen to 75 percent, the lowest since the cuts began in January.

It cited weak compliance by Algeria, Iraq and the United Arab Emirates.

In addition, OPEC member Libya, which is currently exempt from the output cuts, steeply increased output.

As a result, the overall global oil supply rose by 520,000 bpd in July to stand 500,000 bpd above year-ago levels.

Adding to the challenges of oil producers to support oil prices is rising non-OPEC output, which is expected to expand by 0.7 million bpd in 2017 and by 1.4 million bpd in 2018 on strong gains in the United States, which is not participating in the output caps.

Still, strong global demand growth is helping to clear excess barrels with the IEA registering a decline in stocks in industrialized nations in both June and July.

Stocks remain 219 million barrels above a 5-year average - a level that OPEC is targeting with its output cuts.

The IEA also revised historic demand data for 2015-2016 for developing countries, cutting it by 0.2-0.4 million bpd.

As a result of those historic revisions, the IEA cut baseline demand figures for 2017-2018 by around 0.3-0.4 million bpd and hence lowered demand for OPEC crude by the same amount.

"The impact of carrying this lower demand base into 2017 against unchanged supply numbers is that stock draws later in the year are likely to be lower than first thought," the IEA said.

Changes mainly happened as the IEA revised down historic demand data for Indonesia, Malaysia and Iran while revising up India and keeping China largely unchanged.

Reporting by Dmitry Zhdannikov; editing by Dale Hudson and Jason Neely


https://www.reuters.com/article/us-iea- ... SKBN1AR0M5
I should be able to change a diaper, plan an invasion, butcher a hog, design a building, write, balance accounts, build a wall, comfort the dying, take orders, give orders, cooperate, act alone, solve equations, pitch manure, program a computer, cook, fight efficiently, die gallantly. Specialization is for insects.
User avatar
Tanada
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 13914
Joined: Thu 28 Apr 2005, 02:00:00
Location: South West shore Lake Erie, OH, USA

Re: THE International Energy Agency (IEA) pt 2

Unread postby asg70 » Fri 11 Aug 2017, 11:21:28

I'm looking forward to the glut ending and prices going up so the ETP zealots will have their day of reckoning.
Hubbert's curve, meet S-curve: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
asg70
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 954
Joined: Sun 05 Feb 2017, 13:17:28

Re: THE International Energy Agency (IEA) pt 2

Unread postby ROCKMAN » Fri 11 Aug 2017, 12:00:22

"Producers should find encouragement from demand, which is growing year-on-year more strongly than first thought,"

So let's follow the logic: For 2016, the IEA extricated worldwide average demand of was almost 96 million barrels of oil. It also notes the average price of oil that year was $45/bbl.

The IEA notes demand in 2013 was 90.6 million bopd and prices were $90+/bbl.

So demand from 2013 thru 2016 increased 5.4 million bopd and prices fell about 50%. Ya know, it almost seems as if oil prices are not determined by demand. In fact, at least in recent years, demand has been determined by the price of oil.

Wow! Do ya think oil demand might actually decrease if oil prices increase significantly? That seems contrary to the IEA's expectations that future oil demand increases will happen as oil prices increase.
User avatar
ROCKMAN
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 10547
Joined: Tue 27 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: TEXAS

Re: THE International Energy Agency (IEA) pt 2

Unread postby rockdoc123 » Fri 11 Aug 2017, 15:03:10

So demand from 2013 thru 2016 increased 5.4 million bopd and prices fell about 50%. Ya know, it almost seems as if oil prices are not determined by demand. In fact, at least in recent years, demand has been determined by the price of oil.


you seem to be forgetting the other side of the coin...supply.
User avatar
rockdoc123
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 5441
Joined: Mon 16 May 2005, 02:00:00

Re: THE International Energy Agency (IEA) pt 2

Unread postby Subjectivist » Sat 12 Aug 2017, 13:36:03

ROCKMAN wrote:"Producers should find encouragement from demand, which is growing year-on-year more strongly than first thought,"

So let's follow the logic: For 2016, the IEA extricated worldwide average demand of was almost 96 million barrels of oil. It also notes the average price of oil that year was $45/bbl.

The IEA notes demand in 2013 was 90.6 million bopd and prices were $90+/bbl.

So demand from 2013 thru 2016 increased 5.4 million bopd and prices fell about 50%. Ya know, it almost seems as if oil prices are not determined by demand. In fact, at least in recent years, demand has been determined by the price of oil.

Wow! Do ya think oil demand might actually decrease if oil prices increase significantly? That seems contrary to the IEA's expectations that future oil demand increases will happen as oil prices increase.


Oil prices are like every other commodity, there is a balance between supply and demand heavily influenced by price. Not only that oil historically shows an inelastic tendency, when supply goes up prices don't drop very far very fast, but when supply goes down prices shoot up very quickly and stick at higher levels.
II Chronicles 7:14 if my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land.
User avatar
Subjectivist
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 4060
Joined: Sat 28 Aug 2010, 06:38:26
Location: Northwest Ohio

Re: I.E.A. states we have 9 trillion barrels left

Unread postby AdamB » Sat 12 Aug 2017, 17:22:37

shortonsense wrote:
Bas wrote:Wooooohoooo!!! [smilie=5baby.gif]


And to think I had the impression they were becoming more pessimistic in recent years, how wrong I was...


The 9 trillion number has been around awhile, all it requires is a little research and then some addition.

The entire game appears to revolve around the conversion of those resources into reserves, the peakers trying to limit the volumes to the smallest numbers to scare people ( think...climate types and their models ), and the geologists and such noting for the record that there is much more available than most people think. Adding up all the obvious forms can hit 9 trillion barrels, and the IEA is just noticing like the geoscience guys do.


Well now. What do we have here? Yes Mr Short, the number is indeed around 9 trillion. And yes, it doesn't take much to find it. And yes, the peaksters do not think in terms of resource to reserve conversion, as folks like Short repeatedly demonstrate.
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 2851
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

Re: I.E.A. states we have 9 trillion barrels left

Unread postby AdamB » Sat 12 Aug 2017, 17:31:43

pstarr wrote:
shortonsense wrote:
Bas wrote:Wooooohoooo!!! [smilie=5baby.gif]


And to think I had the impression they were becoming more pessimistic in recent years, how wrong I was...


The 9 trillion number has been around awhile, all it requires is a little research and then some addition.

The entire game appears to revolve around the conversion of those resources into reserves, the peakers trying to limit the volumes to the smallest numbers to scare people ( think...climate types and their models ), and the geologists and such noting for the record that there is much more available than most people think. Adding up all the obvious forms can hit 9 trillion barrels, and the IEA is just noticing like the geoscience guys do.
You have made two strategic political/social errors here and you lost any lingering audiance you may have developed at PO.


Oh now this should be good. Pstarr back when he had more neurons and someone who knows information peakers absolutely want nothing to do with, and appears to even been banned for it,

pstarr wrote:By denigrating "climate types" you have cavalierly dismissed the vast majority of educated intelligent middle class readers who understand the threat of global climate change.

Says the driver of a CO2 spewing monstrosity who can't be botherede] to EV. You have no right between clear cutting specation hobbies and CO2 spewing to lecture anyone on this topic. Strike 1 for Mr "I emit CO2 whenever I drive and refuse to stop".

pstarr wrote:You then lost the rest
The US remains one of the world's largest petroleum producers at 6 billion per day.


No Mr "I really didn't know anything a decade ago either", the US doesn't make 6 billion barrels per day. Strike 2 against a banned poster who knew more in a single post then you have demonstrated in the past year or two I've been here now.
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 2851
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

Re: I.E.A. states we have 9 trillion barrels left

Unread postby AdamB » Sat 12 Aug 2017, 17:38:16

shortonsense wrote:
Cloud9 wrote:Good to know I have been worried about nothing. :-D


As incorrect an assumption as the peak oil "we're all going to die" argument itself.

Resource depletion is a real issue, and estimating it, size, effect, and timing, honestly and scientifically, matters.

Unfortunately, a vast majority of the arguments put forth within peaker mythology should not be confused with an actual resource depletion debate.

For a vast majority of the people involved, PO is just a rationalization. For a minority, its an important scientific question. The qualifiers should really be reversed.


Three posts read and this guy, I'm adding to my list of "Mr" references. Eeek gads, I think he's got it!

Mr Short, I'll bet I know why you were banned. Wisdom beyond your time.
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 2851
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

Re: I.E.A. states we have 9 trillion barrels left

Unread postby AdamB » Wed 16 Aug 2017, 19:25:39

shortonsense wrote:
And now, with quite reasonable fuel prices since the summer of 2008, what is coming up next? Why, PHEV's and EV's to the regular consumer. And what else? Why...the wind generated electrical capacity to power them.


Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the BEST prognosticator declaration on this website yet. Mr Short spots the upcoming EV buildout, AND the wind generation frenzy, and he did this from the better part of a decade ago.

Does anyone know what happened to someone who obviously knew what was going on, while standing in a pile of doomers who could only ban him in response for being...RIGHT?
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 2851
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

Re: I.E.A. states we have 9 trillion barrels left

Unread postby AdamB » Wed 16 Aug 2017, 19:28:02

rangerone314 wrote:Hoorah! 9 trillion barrels left...

So when does oil production rise to 90 million barrels?


Apparently, just a few years after you made this comment!
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 2851
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

Re: I.E.A. states we have 9 trillion barrels left

Unread postby AdamB » Wed 16 Aug 2017, 19:31:31

TonyPrep wrote:
shortonsense wrote:Good thing I specialize in science and critical thinking
Oh boy.

Shakes head in disbelief.


Well Tony, if you can but point out a good prognostication you made back when everyone was screaming at you that it was impossible, I will add you to my Mr. list!!
Peak oil in 2020: And here is why: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b3ttqYDwF0
AdamB
Volunteer
Volunteer
 
Posts: 2851
Joined: Mon 28 Dec 2015, 16:10:26

Previous

Return to Peak Oil Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 guests